Mike,

Very well done!

Good to see Ole Ray backed up with data and not "SHIT".

How about letting us in on more of your wisdom about the 404.

Roger QSL

Outstanding, Mike, and the only people likely to take offense at your comments are the ones who prefer hot air to hard data. I use 93 grains of 4831 and a 24" barrel hoping to arrive at 2400 fps. Sometime this winter I'm going to have to take it out with a chronograph and see if I've succeeded. Whether or not I've done what I wanted on paper, I can say this, on game it do der job! I'm also going to work up a British style load behind your 380 grainers. That should make for a really pleasent shooting load to go with my prospective converted Pedersoli. Lethal, too.

.

Oh man, oh man,
Missiles are getting launched from BC toward Twin Falls and Wyoming and I'm under the flight path .
"C'mon Ma, let's head for the root cellar. When we come up in a week the nuclear winter will already have started."
"Oh dear Pa, is Alf ciphering again?"

.

Sorry guys pardon my ignorance but i'm really stupid when it comes to reloading and stuff and i'm still not getting it:

Alf,

That is clear.

All your stuff is based on what you read and quoting what you read.

Stick with pictures of Classic Rifles and serial numbers and who made "what" etc.

Your handloading experience is so poor that you had the 416 Remington at 140 grains (plus) capacity. It then took a few postings before you grasped the idea that you read the wrong numbers.

You obviously have no experience at all with loading powders that are seen to be too slow for a calibre.....I have a news flash for you...often the velocities will be higher than you would think....As an example, the Australian powder sold in the US as H4350 is about IMR4831 burn rate but that powder will give much better velocities when it "is too slow" than will IMR 4350 when it is "too slow"

Alf, "no one" and I mean "no one" who has extensive experience with reloading feels the need to quote "sources" and all your postings on ballistics/handloading etc always involve you quoting sources.

Again...Stick with pictures of Classic Rifles and serial numbers and who made "what" etc.

When it comes to reloading etc you are so far out of your depth that it is embarassing.

Mike

This is a great thread







Pop corn and beer anyone ?



Cheers,



Andr�

Nitro,

If we only post on what we have experience with then I guess the number of postings will be reduced.

Are saying that if a person new to reloading buys a 404 tomorrow that counts for a lot.

Mike

Mike at NF didn't get 2600 but like Saeed he got close enough for Gov. work, and he was not using RWS brass which has a lot more case capacity and he was not using a 27 inch barrel, based on that he told me my figures coorelated pretty close to his...

That is the load I use, I have chronographed it and I have used it since gun scribe Hoyt ? recommended it some years back as the load for a 404 Jeffery and at those velocities..I have chronographed it in most of the 404s I have had and it was right at that velocity, taking each guns barrel length into consideration...

All my 404s hold more water and powder than Alfs...I am satisfied with my findings and will continue to use them.

My main gripe is none of the bull shitters have yet to pull out the chronograph and check out the load, all I see is a bunch of figures that really have little meaning...so maybe the paper tigers should test the load and then make some intelligent comments...and test it in a 27" barrel as I have stated many times that I did...If you don't have a 27 inch barrel as the original Jefferys did then correlate the velocity down...

At any rate I will use and care less about all the BS.....

As to the 416 vs. 404, I like them both and thats the two bolt guns I use most, I can't tell much difference, but it seems that just maybe the 404 has killed a bit faster for me, but maybe not and I am shooting it considerably faster and that could make a difference I guess, not sure of that either...I do know that when you shoot the new 450 gr. Woodleighs in a 416, then you can tell a difference, it outclasses the 404, at least thats my opine based on shooting about 5 or more buffalo with it. The 450 gr. Woodleigh RN and PP impressed me, the PP was the better penetrator but the RN caused tremendous internal damage and killed very fast.......Then again, the 404 with a 380 gr. NorthFork soft is the only gun that I have gotten one of those instant electrocution style kills out of and then I have seen a couple of more since that time from those good Northfork softs, so who knows....If I ever figure out which is best I will sure let you know, in the meantime I will remain in darkness, until Alf guides me into the light.

One is, of course, at liberty to load his own rifles as he sees fit.

In all the data we develop, we try to see what is the highest velocity we can get from the rifle under test, with the components we use.

We try to be practical about it, rather than go the scientific way of doing things, as we have found one comes across a rifle which throws all the rules out of the window. Sometimes it is easy to see why this sort of thing happen with that partcular rifle, and sometimes, frankly, we are totally at a loss why it behaves in such a manner.

A friend once brought in a brand new European made rifle in 243 Winchester. He wanted me to load some ammo for him. He also brought some Sako factory loads.

I thought of adjusting the scope with the factory ammo.

As I fired my first shot, I had some gasses blown back into my face!!??

I ejected the empty, and both the case and primer came out seperated. This is a sure sign of very high pressure!!

I loaded a round with 3 grains less than a starting load from one of the loading books.

The same thing happened!!??

I fired one of the Sako factory ammo in one of my own rifles, and it showed absolutely no sign of it having excessive pressure.

We had to see what is causing this problem. And after all sorts of tricks, we slugged the barrel, and sure enough, instead of a groove diameter of .243, it had a groove diameter of only 0.239!!

We took the barrel off and replaced it with a new one.

On another occasion we had another rifle from a European manufacturer. This time in 300 Winchester magnum. It had a 24 inch barrel, and even with maximum book loads, the closest to published velocities we could get out of it was about 200 fps less!!??

We tried to find what is causing this, and came up empty handed.

This is an amazing thread. Comparing two cartridges that are used for similar functions. A while back, there was voiced some complaints from credible professional hunters that the factory 416 Remington Magnum was too hot. The factory load with a Swift A frame bullet at 2400 f/s was sticking in chambers and creating problems. There was also a similar finding with the Zimbabwe Professional Hunters Association hunting test.

The 416 Rem Mag is easier to get than the 404, however, beyond that fact the 404 is superior as is the 416 Rigby.The original objective was a heavy bullet at moderate velocity and low pressure. This is not what the 416 Remington round is about. It, in fact, is just the
opposite from what we see in the 416 Remington.
Shooting the 400 gr. bullet faster than the original 416 Rigby that the Remmington is supposed to emulate/replace can only be achieved by significantly increasing the pressure to a point that problems can develope. Of all the rounds we have today, the Rigby has the lowest pressure to achieve its target ballistics, the 404 Jeffery is next, then the 416 Remington.
I think the best arguement for the Jeffery is that it can SAFELY be loaded down or up as needs be and still be an effective round. A 400 gr. Bullet at from 2100-2400+ f/sec. and have manageable recoil. I have all three calibers and I think the Jeffery is kinder to the shoulder than the Remington or the Rigby. My rifles are stocked so similar and weigh close to the same that the perceived recoil should reflect true "felt recoil" as much as is possible.

NFMike,
Very well and good. Much appreciated.
I don't think that my gun is loose in chamber or throat (Dave Manson minimum throat reamer and tight chamber by fired brass inspection and measure)... but the barrel is a 10" twist McGowen, and the bearing surface of the lands is very small. They look like micro-lands with very wide grooves, and only six grooves, so only six skinny lands.

This is what keeps my pressures low, less barrel friction, so less resistance even with the fast twist.

I do not care to use a drop tube if I can avoid it. Varget 81 grains makes the 400 grain Woodleigh go 2400 fps in my rifle.

83 grains of Varget makes the 380 grain North Fork SP or FP go 2529 fps, IIRC, and sub-MOA if I do my part.

Thanks for posting. I'll be looking forward to the new .423 bullets.

I think I will try a different barrel on the African Sheep Rifle in .404 Jeffery. One with wider lands to get the pressures up with the slower powders. But then again, the one I have is about as good as it gets with my lot of Varget.

Alf,

Sorry, I missed this part of your posting.

I was lead to believe on this very AR that Ray's loads and findings were actually verified by Mike Brady at NF when just a few posts before mr Brady clearly points out that he too did not get to that magic number 2600, So how would you with your practical wisdom on this caliber explain that?

Which posting is Mike Brady. I can't find a post by that name..so his "handle"

Mike

.

Dear Alf

I have no experience with the 404. But surely as a medical specialist you would agree that a cardiothoracic surgeon does not need to have had a heart attack to do coronary by pass. Perhaps orthopods are different and can only do knees or hips if they have had their own knee or hip done.

BUT, I do have experience reloading and I think my comments on the earlier part of this thread have been backed.

I have loaded enough different calibres over many years to know (as I have already said) that quite often the powder that is too slow often gives full velocity.

In short the case capacity of the 404 (remember you were the one that fucked up on that basic) indicates it would do 2600 plus based on loadings I have done with the 416 Remington. Saeeds data is at 2600 plus.

I also know that while Ray Atkinson does his fair share of cracker barrel bullshit he has also been going on about his load over and over and in addition he links himself with the 404. If he had been bullshitting about his data he would have backed off long ago.

I would certainly not have expected the 404 to get the full 2600 f/s with IMR 4831 but again....I have seen full velocities with powders that are deemed as being to slow not to discount what Atkinson has been saying.

As to all your comments on different bullet types etc...who cares, we are talking about velocity potential and in particular the 416 Rem Vs the 404 Jeffery. Thus it is a case of ...if all else is equal...

I would remind you that with all the fuckups you had on case capacities on this thread it might be prudent of you to examine more closely some of your other data.

Mike

Andr'e,

Don't want you sucking down too many beers, so the following paragraph from Mike should help put some water on fire that seems to be getting a little hot.



2650fps. Observing pressures as loads were increased, and extrapolating that out to 2625fps (adjusting 25fps for the one inch of barrel), my gun would have required another 9 to 10,000psi to achieve that ~120fps increase in velocity, or 64 to 65,000psi (equivalent to ~5 grs pressure change). Before the nay sayers start pointing fingers and yelling ahaaa, I say so friggin what. That IS the pressure that the 416 Remington operates at. A 404 at 65K will show no more pressure "indications" than a 416 at 65K. Would I operate at those pressures? No I wouldn't. That is just a personal opinion and if you go back and read what Ray had said initially, he doesn't operate there either. That was an experimental top load for information purposes; that wasn't his hunting load. Some of you folks are going to have to accept that Ray sometimes just enjoys rattling your cages because your cages are so easily rattled.


Hopefully, Mike will share more of his experiences with us, as he seems to know a lot about the 404.

Roger QSL

I can't believe this thread is still going.

All because Ray mixed up the data from two different rifles and thus showed an increase of 222 fps for two grains of powder added, going from 93 to 95 grains of IMR4831 while simultaneously shifting from 23.6" (600mm) rifle barrel to 27" barrel.

That is the only thing that can explain it, assuming some other special conditions were just right also, factors of powder density and speed (lot-to-lot variation), brass capacity variation, and tightness of rifle chamber and bore, ambient temperature, "chrony-factor," etc.

Bottom line: some boo boo was made somewhere in the reporting of the data that inspired all this, some years ago.

Ray, you are forgiven for yanking our chains.

PPS Your new T-shirt that says "Goddamnit Ray, I am not a dentist!" looks nice.

Brother RIP,
I hope this thread never dies. I just can't decide whether to build a .404 Jeffery on a Winchester or a CZ.
JCN
PS Mom says Ray still won't return her calls.

Thanks for posting that, Saeed.

I think that I am going to get the same water capacities when I measure mine.



Also, I do not think that your loads are excessively fast, and they probably max out around 60,000 psi.



Your 405 grain Walterhogs in your 25.75" barrel gave the same velocities as the 380 grain North Fork SP and FP in my 24" barrel with Varget, with the same brass-primer-powder charge throughout the range.



I think that stopping at 2500 fps with the Varget and 380 grain NorthFork is about 50,000 psi. Probably a 50Kpsi load for a 400 grain Woodleigh soft or solid at 2400 fps with Varget.



And that is just fine.



Temperature stability is best with Varget.



You need test no other powders.