The Accurate Reloading Forums THE ACCURATE RELOADING.COM FORUMS Hunting African Big Game Hunting Re: Weight and Capacity Of Our 416 Rem and 404 BrassGo | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply | |
| Re: Weight and Capacity Of Our 416 Rem and 404 Brass | Login/Join |
One of Us |
posted by Alf: Quote: I've been reloading for over forty years and the term....."feet per second per grain of powder" has literally no meaning to me. Further to assert that velocity is somehow linear to powder used is a new concept to me. I have a chronograph and have used it in developing loads for many years now and I've never once discovered a linear velocity relationship to the amount of powder I used. Further I've found that each rifle seems to generate it's own unique ballistics bearing only similarities to similar chambered rifles. What Ray is getting from his .404 is irrelevant to me.....If I can't get it, well.....then I go back to RL15 and continue from there. I won't doubt Ray in the least.....but I'd be insane to try to make my gun duplicate a load when excess pressure signs abound, just because someene else has done it..... How long does one have to be a reloader to understand that???????? | ||
|
Moderator |
Quote: I don't know first hand (which is why I mentioned above that I don't have a dog in this fight)....I was just passing on what I have been reading here. The guys with RWS brass can get 95 grains in with a drop tube or substantial compression, and the rest are getting bulged cases or stopping at about 93 grains. | |||
|
| Moderator |
Quote: vapodog, I don't think ALF is trying to say the the relationship is prefectly linear. It is a good way to ballpark the effect of increasing a powder charge, even it its not exact. I am pretty sure what ALF is really doing, however, is simply pointing to the fact that the velocity per grain of powder is fairly consistent among everyone's top loads, right up until Ray's load jumps from 93gr up to 95gr. At that point, the velocity per grain spikes big-time, and by plain physics so must the pressure. Mike Brady makes a really good point that the pressure spike might only get it into the realm of a factory 416 Rem load (BTW, Welcome to the forum Mike!), but ALF is promoting the thought that the actual pressure is unsafe and, by extension, that a guy with Ray's experience should stop recommending that load on a public forum. Quite frankly, I always enjoy this particular debate. Its usually somewhat educational (for instance, Mike Brady brought a new perspective to the table this time), and its always entertaining. I am an avid boxing fan and I missed the Berrara v. Morales fight this weekend (I was at our annual Bison Roundup  ), so this has been a great surrogate for me. Scoring-wise, I think I am giving the initial rounds to Ray (and tag team partner Mike375) as ALF suffered a near knockdown stemming from a few solid blows over the 404/416 case capacity blunder. Since then he has recovered nicely though, and has taken the latter rounds on a good jab and a couple hard power shots. Ray, just as a side note...I have no dog in this fight, but I have always wondered....you dump on "improved wildcats" (such as the Gibbs line) because you have to run higher pressures than the standard cartridge to get much "improvement" and then in the very next breath you will go to the opposite extreme to defend the last fps you can wring out of your 95 grain 404J load. Where's the consistency of logic? Cheers, Canuck | |||
|
| One of Us |
Quote: Finally.......a statement I can agree with....... Sorry all you AI advocates. | |||
|
| Administrator |
I just fired ONE shot with each of the following loads: 85.0 VVN 165 - 2117 fps 90.0 H4831 - 2308 92.0 - 2353 95.0 - 2431 90.0 VVN 550 - 2602 86.0 Varget - 2599 I will try a few more tomorrow. | |||
|
| one of us |
Canuck, The "improved" cartridges cannot significantly improve internal ballistics without increasing the operating pressure. Sorry but those are the facts. Actually some of the improved cases are actually unimproving since they reduce the efficiency and result in higher pressure for the same velocity!! I am afraid that the majority of "improved" cartridges are ONLY "improvements" in the minds of the creators or guys that think they "look cooler". ASS_CLOWN | |||
|
| one of us |
Saeed, Very interesting results, and VERY predictable I might also add. ASS_CLOWN | |||
|
| Moderator |
Quote: Allen, it was a frustrating incident, that's for sure. At the time I posted it there were other members that had experienced similar results with the Remington Premier Safari ammo. I initially thought the brass was soft, but I reloaded some of it and experienced no problems at all with my usual loads. I did pull some bullets from the factory ammo to look at it. The powder charge was 71 to 73 grains of something that looked like W748. That is right..there were variations of up to 2 grains. My theory changed from soft brass to too much of a powder that was too fast. I reloaded said cases with 73 grains of RL 15 (my standard load), and there was no problems with the cases or flattening of the primers. Cheers, Canuck | |||
|
| Administrator |
I went and made a few more 404 bullets before removing our old lathe today. I have already molly coated them, and will shoot them tomorrow using H4831 - we don't have any IMR powders I am afraid, and will report back to you with our results. | |||
|
| one of us |
Also, of course, the slugging of the bore on the McGowen barrel must be mentioned. It measured 0.423" across the grooves and is a true match to the bullet diameters I use. This may be more consequential than the McGowen "Micro-lands." This barrel is looser than the Lothar Walther barrels that slug 0.422" or whatever. The Lothar Walther barrels must be tighter. This has been a merry chase across many threads and years. I appreciate everyone staying with this. Made me think about a lot of things I hadn't thought about in relation to the .404 Jeffery. Sorry about any heartburn for Ray, but hey, he is a big guy who can take it, eh? And what could possibly be more fun than yanking Ray's chain? Ray's load is absolutely understandable with his components. IMR4831 RWS brass Lothar Walther barrel. I now have to wonder if H4350 might not be the best powder in .422" and .423" barrels???  In summary, Ray is right again, the .416 Rigby cannot hold a candle to the .404 Jeffery, which outshines them all. Three cheers for the .404 Jeffery! First crowned in 1905, and still the champ. The oldest and the best of bolt action rifle cartridges for big game. It can't be beat ... unless it could be by the .416 Dakota. | |||
|
| one of us |
Quote: Hahahahaha CLASSIC!! | |||
|
| <allen day> |
Canuck, I must not have been paying attention at the time. I didn't realize that you had the same problem yourself! This problem must have been more widespread that I ever suspected it to be. Mike, I don't think the problem is due to soft brass. I can load Remington cases for that same rifle, and there is no hint of a hard bolt lift, nor ejector cut marks, etc. AD | ||
|
| one of us |
Stuff 92, or 93 grains of 4831 (the buffalo or elephant won't notice the difference)in a case and have a ball! A 400-grain bullet moving 2350-2400 fps is pretty potent medicine. I DO shoot a 404 and find 95 grains to be too much -- FOR ME! Granted, I don't use a drop tube to load. I would try different powders, like Varget, but I'm perfectly happy with my present hunting load. I get MOA accuracy with just about any bullet, and 5000 ft.-lbs of energy. What more could I ask for(except for more time and money to hunt the game this gun is intended for)? | |||
|
| one of us |
Ray, I suggest you re-read MY posts. Canuck told me that people have problems getting 95 grains of IMR4831 into a 404 case, I said I found that difficult to believe! My posts are FAR from ridiculous, your load however is! Tell you what, I would very much like to meet you Ray and fire that 404 Jeffery of yours over MY chronograph. I will spring for the IMR4831, you bring the primers, bullets, cases, and rifle. Why don't you stop by the 3rd annual AR festivities at Sterling Heights. You can of course write it off as a business expense. If your load shoots 2650 fps I will never question you again. We will try both your 93 grain and 95 grain loads. I have faith that the 93 grain load will run around 2350 - 2400 fps, just like you said. I personally figure that the 95 grain load will run in the 2450 to 2500 fps range. Then you can watch me show you first hand, over the exact same measuring device (chronograph) what a 416 Rigby can do, and believe me it can do a whole lot more than 2650 fps. Then we can bench or off hand shoot a 500 for kicks (no pun intended) to see who is better. Heck you can even fire off the old M1895 / 405 Winchester shooting them high pressure loads everyone says will either blow up the rifle or make the lever stick. Newsflash a lever action has a whole lot more mechanical advantage for extraction than a Mauser bolt action does. Of course we could always wait till I get my arse out west to Idaho. Could be a while though. ASS_CLOWN | |||
|
| Moderator |
Quote:Quote: Recono, Yah, I worded my question to Ray poorly, I guess because I knew he would know what I was referring to. More specifically, Ray has many times condemned the improved wildcats because the people that own them operate them at high pressures (presumably to justify the "improvement"). And therein lies the inconsistency that I see -- whats good for the goose is not good for the gander. By way of example, Ray has specifically poo-poo'd the Gibbs line of wildcats many times. I think mainly because he had a bad experience with the hydraulic case forming die. What I never understood though was the comments about case capacity and pressure that went along with it. The Gibbs line has a greater increase in case capacity over their counterparts than his 404 has over the 416 Rem (on a percentage basis). Following the logic he applies to his 404 loads, the Gibbs line should be the sho-nuff hands down winner over the standard '06's, even if you do end up operating them at higher pressures. Anyhoo, I am not trying to start a fight or a gang war with this. I was just curious why one would condemn high pressures etc on one hand and embrace it on the other. Cheers, Canuck | |||
|
| one of us |
With the advent of Ass Clowns stupid and ridiculas posts based on absolutly nothing, and his claims that an RWS case is thicker than other brass, that a RWS case won't hold 95 grs. of IMR-4831, the post has become less than a good argueing conversation, and turned to the sublime..... I can put 95 grs. into a Norma case and I do get compression, but it certainly does not swell my cases...I get the claimed velocity and will substantianate that to anyone who drops by the house....and I have hunted and shot Buffalo with that load in hot weather..I have fired one case 14 times when I worked up the load from the magazine article...With RWS brass I don't have compression with that load....Like Saeed I have no pressure testing equipment, and go by sticky bolts, primer examination and miking case heads..Maybe its in the 55,000 PSI, (but I find no problem with that,) I can't say for sure, but I can say that I have been shooting that load for years without problems of any kind, and brass life is excellent...Jim Brockman has shot it in his guns, but objects to the recoil...and I have stated many times that my standard using load these days is 93 grs. of IMR-4831 as the recoil is mild and its enough for Buffalo... I see little need to continue the subject with the joining of someone like Ass Clown, who deteriates every post he gets on...So I am out of here, and will continue to use my loads in my guns. Canuck, In reply to your posts on my posts on Wildcats re: Gibbs, I did find the Gibbs rounds to be really hot, and I have read that in many articles, it's pretty much accepted by the experts that Gibbs got those velocities by using very hot loads, that they must be really hot to improve the balistics to the point that he did..but I see no coorelation to this and my loading of the 404, as I am not getting those Gibbs like results in my 404, in fact I am not getting any indication of pressure with my 95 gr. load, again it could have been the gun, chamber and/or the barrel in both cases. As to punches and "fighting" with Alf, I am not in a boxing match with Alf or anyone, I simply do not agree with him, and see no reason to be a "shrinking violet" in his or anyone elses presence...I respect all the opinnions for the most part, and Alfs opinnion on most everything, this is an exception...If, in fact, he is pissed then I apoligise, but I will stand by my load and velocity, I have no reason not to.... | |||
|
one of us |
Alan, Though pre-WWI .404's might have varied from manufacturer to manufacturer, or simply by less strict tolerances within manufacturers, post-WWII dimensions are indeed standardized by the C.I.P. Beyond that, you are absolutely correct. .416 Rem is much more common and no animal on Earth could tell the difference between the blow delivered by either of them. I must admit that for the practical hunter, the .416 is likely the better choice. However, as ALF puts it, so pithily, laudator temporis acti drove me to the .404 . . . and here I stand, I can do no other! | |||
|
| <allen day> |
Sarge, I am happy to say that I respect you and understand your point of view completely. I wouldn't want to be a buffalo, lion, or anything else that gets in the way of a bullet fired from a .404 Jeffery........ AD | ||
|
One of Us |
Not sure what all this is about but...I always have to laugh when people bring up practicality of a big bore...as if we are going to shoot hundreds of rounds at a time for practice. If you want a Jeffrey get a Jeffrey...if you want a 416 get a 416... Like with short magnums...if doing the same thing in a smaller package excites you...buy one...if not don't | |||
|
| Administrator |
Ladies and Gentlemen, R-P 416 Remington case, once fired, with a fired primer: 216 grains. Water capacity of this case is 104.0 grains. Norma 404 case, once fired, with fired primer: 299.1 grains Water capacity of thie case is 116.8 grains. Just thought some of you might be interested in knowing this | |||
|
| one of us |
Thanks Saeed. I have wondered why someone didn't check this and post it earlier. I guess most people who have a 416 rem don't need a 404 too. Therefore few have both brass laying around. Perhaps this will end the controversey that took over an otherwise good thread. But then again people being people, maybe not. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Saeed, That puts the 404 at 12.3% bigger than the 416 Rem. The net increase in capacity with a bullet seated would be slightly bigger. If the bullet is seated .5" deep then net capacity will be reduced by about 17 grains of water so: 416 = 87 404 = 100 That is 15% increase which if all else is equal would mean the 404 should be about 15/4 faster, that is, 3.75% faster. I found the 416 Rem was OK with top loads for 2500 with 400 grainers so 404 should be able to do 2500 X 1.0375 = 2595. Add another 20 f/s for the increase in bore diameter from .416 to .423 and we have a potential 2620 or so for the 404 Mike | |||
|
| one of us |
I agree with you, but what I really have to laugh about is how anyone can look at those two cases and imagine in their mind that the .416 Remmie is a bigger case than the .404. If I remember correctly, "way back then," when the original thread started, that was the claim. I may be wrong, but that is what I recall. I have to agree with arguement that the .416 Remmie is the more practical for the "average Joe", but if you can afford to have a use for either I think you should be able to afford the .404 ammo. It's different and some people like that, power to them, I'll support 'em. Nor do I buy into the arguement of pressure problems with the .416 Remmie, maybe with that thing called the mod. 700, but not the cartridge. It is not fit to chambered in DG caliber in my opinion. Naturally, I recognize there will be those that don't see it that way. Nostalgia is sometimes important in feeling comfortable. Try a .404 with a pith helmet! They will compliment each other. | |||
|
| one of us |
Saeed: This what I got with some of my brass: Quote: Saeed: Do you have a proven Pressure reading for any of your Varget loads? Why I'm asking is with just one pressure reading for any of the loads one can plot a pressure / muzzle energy curve that would predict where you are with the loads in terms of a pressure cieling? Mike 375 On what do you base your calculations / predictions ? You use only two parameters of the 7 or so major parameters in the pressure equation and yet you make the assumption of a potential velocity cieling? You are using capacity and bore diameter which are two of the major factors but omit to say what powder burning rate ( propellant quickness) and powder charge you are using. The reason why I'm bringing this up is cause the 404 was designed as a Cordite based cartridge, hence the volumenous case and today we shoot modern propellants and the potential to overload with this large case is very real. A warning that everyone who has ever commercially dealt with this case in a modern sense has warned against. To boot we are shooting modern monometal bullets of unknown hardness so we know very little of the potential pressure generated by engraving of the bullet by the bore. Chris Bekker in the RSA has looked into the hardness of variuos of the new homegrown commercial monometal bullets and some are very hard indeed. The Impala Bullets are apparently very hard and they would certainly raise more pressure mm for mm to any other. In the pressure equation we have pressure cieling limits that are determined by bore diameter and muzzle energy. This is a linear relationship and you cannot escape it. You cannot push as 423 or 416 caliber 400 gr bullet beyond a certain muzzle velocity within our current ballsitics setup ( ie current brass case / rifle bolt contruct ) without violating the pressure cieling. As a sidebar. The 458 Win / 458 Lott / 458 3inch demonstrates this principle very elloguently. With the 458 win you have a case capacity limitation, so Lott pushed it out by a 1/4 inch with predictable result. Koos Barnard and others in the RSA took the Lott and pushed that out by another 1/4 inch and now has a 3 inch case, again with a predictable velocity gain, but now they ran into problems. This 3 inch case produces muzzle energies that border and in some instances overtake the pressure cielings allowed for in our construct. They cannot for instance shoot 600 gr bullets from the 3 inch cause the pressure is to high, the cases stick ! It would therefore appear on face value that we are put back to 450 -500 gr bullets on this particular 458 to keep pressure acceptable. | |||
|
| <allen day> |
All of this is great, but the .416 Remington is still a more practical cartridge. For one thing it's AVAILABLE. For another thing, chamber and brass dimensions of the .416 Remington are very much standardized, but .404 Jeffery brass and chamber dimensions have never really been standardized and can vary quite a bit. On game, I suspect you won't see a whole lot of difference in terms of performance bewteen them. The Jeffery holds an edge in the romance department, and I guess that's important to some people........... AD | ||
|
| Administrator |
ALF, No sir I have no pressure figures for any of our loads. But, we used 18 cases for all the loads I posted in a previous message, and they are still intact, with no signs of what one might call excessive pressure at all. I am more inclined to attribute our high velocity to a relatively fast barrel. Once we had a number of Mannlicher Luxus rifles in 270 Winchester. We sighted them all for Norma 150 grain SP factory ammo. The rifles were identical, but the velocities differences we got was very strange. There was about 150 fps difference between the fastest rifle and the slowest one. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Alf, Assuming equally suitable powders then: The percentage increase in velocity is approximately equal to 1/4 of the percentage increase in case capacity. The percentage increase in kinetic energy is equal to 50% of the percentage increase in bore area. Mike | |||
|
| one of us |
Canuck, I read through most of the replies on this thread and it appears that everyone is able to get 95 grains into the case "Norma" with slight compression. I believe it is the mythical 300 fps gain Ray gets with only 2 grains of powder that is getting people's shorts in a bunch. Ray won't ever admit to BSing even though ANYONE with ANY load develop experience KNOWS that you WON'T get a 300 fps gain in muzzle velocity going from 93 gr to 95 gr of IMR4831 behind a 400 gr Woodleigh in a 404 Jeffery. Pressure doesn't suddenly spike up, it continues to increase along a slightly exponential function until something yields at which point the pressure kinda plateaus off. When the case heads begin to yield (read leak gas usually from the primer pocket) you will not see a sudden increase in muzzle velocity, what you will see, besides smoke from the breech, is a reduction in muzzle velocity increase per grain of powder. This is because the pressure is being vented off by the failed case. So 25 fps per grain is a VERY realistic value for a 400 grain woodleigh, being propelled by IMR4831, in a 0.423" bore. You would continue to see ~ 25 fps (+/- 2 or 3 fps) per grain of powder all the way up to such time as the case began to fail and leak gas, at which time the muzzle velocity per grain of powder would drop off NOT INCREASE! I know I have run these tests in the past, admittedly not with a 404 Jeffery though, perhaps it (the 404 Jeffery) has figured out how to violate (read disprove) the Laws of Physics! I seriously doubt it though! Now can we all just drop this pointless argument? If someone wants to believe the 404 Jeffery is really a 416 Weatherby magnum in a smaller package that operates at 10,000 psi lower pressure, SO WHAT! Seriously, who is the more foolish, the fool or the fool who argues with him? ASS_CLOWN | |||
|
| one of us |
. | |||
|
One of Us |
I can put all of his nonsense to rest, � la bouteille, Aufwiedersehn, � bient�t, cheerio, old bloody self-righteous chap. I have achieved 4,831 fps with an 0.004 (that's ought point ought, ought quatro) grain Swift A-Frame 0.423" magnesium bullet and 59 grains of 3195 at a piezo electrically measured pressure of 94,831 psi. That is, of course, IMFROYSMFI (In My Fr*cking Rifle Only You Stupid Motherfr*cking Idiot). This is all according to my Oehler 04 chronograph prezzurespielsprachen which you can't get but I have obtained anyway and "Nyah, nyah to you, you miserable wannabe ballistician"--through illicit sources of course at an incredibly low, oh so much lower than low, price.* My original "OvertheriverandOberndorfffffamNeckarrrrr" BritishBavarian rifle with incredibly oversexed headspace may not be representative since it is one-of-a-kind and you wouldn't be able to buy one if you were the richest most bloated and undeserving prick on Earth anyway. Also spracht Zarathustra, I only shoot my heavy loads in a 72 inch barrelled .404 Geoffrey (yes, that is what the CIP drawings recite, you illiterate and hopelessly unwashed swine) with 0.4229789999" groooovy diameter grooves and a loose chamber with waaaayyyyy too damned much leade. These loads were awesomely compressed using a rolling pin and an Oester blender set on "FR*CKING PULVERIZE" so don't try this at home unless your parents are well and truly dead. Your velocities and veracities may vary. Now, please, I'm begging, Gute Fr*cking Nacht. *And I was mildly inebriated when I recorded these data so use at thine own bloody risk. **Edited to make slightly less vulgar. P.S.: This is all in good fun and please no one take offense. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Alf..... My my, what an outburst, I'm astounded by your wisdom. Yes, that is reflected in your long and detailed response. I will try and help you through yor respsonse while at the same time allowing for your "special" way of measuring case capacity So you have never read anything from any book, never quoted from any source other than your own. Read lots of books and I am sure there must have been some time when I have posted up "some book numbers" for a comparison. I have often posted data from Hodgdon in response to a posters search for published data. I don't ever remember commenting on the loads. And what would you know about my loading experience...... maybe I do know nothing as you claim, but just maybe I'm not who I say I am and could just be a ballsitician, who knows..... this is the internet where guys move around behind personas. Anyone who posts up the case capacities that you did has serious problems if they hold themselves to know about reloading. Alfy, the most basic reloader could not post up the 416 Remington at 142 grains and then go on to defend what they had posted. So again, stick with posting pictures and serial numbers. I assume the serial numbers would be more accurate than your case capacity numbers. By the way Alf, if ever you get to handle a lot of different cartridges you will just know that the 416 Remington is less than 142 grains. You must have been thinking that the 505 Gibbs would hold 200 to 300 grains I mean just look at our good Mr. Ass-clown. Do you / we really believe that he is who he has lead us to believe he is? Hmmmm methinks not Introducing a troll for some sort of reference indicates that you need mental help. Add your referencing of a troll in the middle of your thread to your inability to recognise basic case capacities...suggests you need urgent mental help. Then there is the issue about reading? You sell insurance dont you? Yes Well it's funny but I deal daily with insurance companies and their lawyers, their forms and reports and you know what, they throw a shit load of money my way for dealing with these. That is the normal practice with specialists who have no work. It is not related to a particular country as the re insurers are international. Hopefully you will be able to move to the full the brothel circuit. Actually I get double the money I would make on a knee replacement for a report> it is actually rude to say the least ! Is'nt that just amazing. If the insurance payment for a medical report is twice what you get for a knee replacement then....go and fucking shoot yourself. But you do have a unique position...one of the very few surgeons in the world who is stuck with insurance company work. The insurance work is for the Physician specialists and your reports will be assessed by the physician specialist. Alf, stick with the pictures and obviously keep away from the surgery. You are unique...not many surgeons in the world boast that they don't do surgery. And you know why cause they ask me for an opinion validated by by what is written in books. In fact the courts demand that very fact from me. Again, it is no wonder you could not make it as the surgeon. Your 142 grain 416 Remington simply illustrated your lack of "feel" and dependence on what you read. With the 142 grain 416 Remington your lack of knowledge and lack of feel meant that you did not recognise the fact that you were reading the wrong page. The world and of course Canada is well off knowing that with medicine your main game in town is doing insurance reports. Now you may balk at my pictures and my guns, Love the pictures and the guns. I make enough money to buy one of those guns I have in my safe, each and every time I get asked to render that opinion. Alf, a bit of "bullshit" there old boy. How many times to you "render that opinion" Some simple arithmetic boyo  Alfy, you can't make it as the surgeon and that is why when the Political forum on AR first started some years ago you did the "socialist" thing. BUT...don't worry..we insurance salesmen will generate work for you. So maybe in my world I live by having to have proof, that's my prerogative, and I like it that way. Sounds good Alf....except....all your numbers were fucked up on the earlier part of the thread...Your world is one where you are reduced to doing insurance reports...lots of room for error and time to fix....as was the case with this thread. Mike | |||
|
| one of us |
Mike375, Quote: I stand in the shadow of your greatness, ol' boy! You are a most definitely a troll's troll!! Quote: Your busting Alf's chops because he mistakenly reported out on the internal case volume of a 416 Remington magnum??? Hell there are FAR worse offenses on this site that that!! Like loads which exceed the internal volume capacity of the case, but many of those have already been beat unto death. Please you and Alf continue on with your "arguing" I find it immensely funny, and I am sure many other do as well. By the way Mike, you are mostly full of crap, and the data you are spewing, what little of your posts can actually be called "data" is all quoted from books to. ASS_CLOWN | |||
|
| one of us |
Quote: It appears to me that that is neither the opposite extreme nor inconsistency. He has not condemned the higher pressure in either case; he has merely claimed that the "improved" cartridge is no improvement, i.e. that virtually the same increase could be achieved with higher pressure without the case "improvement."Unless, of course, I don't understand the objection in the original case, and he had a specific reason for being concerned about high pressures in that cartridge. | |||
|
| Moderator |
Quote: You do understand that the point I was making had nothing to do with advocating "AI's" and the like, right? Canuck | |||
|
| One of Us |
Allen & Canuck The Remington factory ammo you refer to, registered the highest pressure that I have ever seen from factory ammo. With 26" Douglas barrel it was 2510 @ 66,600 (SAAMI MAP IS 65,000, so it wasn't that far off). Granted that the system is suceptable to some small variations due to "pilot error" but the velocity agreed with the pressure, so did the gun and my shoulder. The case came out fine but definitely what I would consider max+. When using HDS brass, extractor marks became obvious at 6,000 lower pressure. That lot of HDS may have been soft but I don't go any where near the those factory pressures, in anyone's brass. Anyone else noticing that the capacities of the 404 brass are running fairly consistent but the 416 isn't. If someone is just grabbing the powder scoop and dumping in what the "book" says, it could be part of the 416 (perceived?) problem. Who knows which case capacity the "book" used? Mike | |||
|
| Administrator |
"...Canuck, The "improved" cartridges cannot significantly improve internal ballistics without increasing the operating pressure. Sorry but those are the facts. Actually some of the improved cases are actually unimproving since they reduce the efficiency and result in higher pressure for the same velocity!! I am afraid that the majority of "improved" cartridges are ONLY "improvements" in the minds of the creators or guys that think they "look cooler". ASS_CLOWN..." Not strictly true at all. When one fires a normal cartridge in an improved chamber, the case does gain more capacity, and more capacity, generally, means more velocity. And for those who want higher velocity, efficiency is not a consideration. At least not in my case. | |||
|
| Moderator |
Ray, Quote: Again, I was just making a general point about pressure. For the record, much like your claims regarding your 95 gr 404 load, I DO get some pretty impressive velocities out of my 6.5 Gibbs without ANY signs of excessive pressure. But that isn't what I was trying to get at. Quote: That was just an analogy and an attempt at some humor (the part about scoring rounds in particular). I was enjoying the back and forth of this discussion, as I usually do, since it generally flushes out some darn good info. Being a boxing fan, the metaphor jumped quickly to mind. Quote: On this it seems I have exagerated the problems in my mind. I have read of at least a few posters over the years that can't even stuff 95 grains of 4831 into their cases, though. Cheers, Canuck | |||
|
| Moderator |
Saeed, I suppose that AssClown's statement is true within a narrow set of circumstances (ie. if you used the same powder and charge). By extension, however, if it were true in all circumstances then a 300 Weatherby would require significantly higher pressures to get its velocity gains over the 300 Winchester, which we all know is not true. Obviously, the increased powder capacity gives the opportunity to increase the area under the pressure curve while still retaining a comparable peak. Efficiency (velocity per grain) is seldom a consideration for a handloader, given that a grain of powder costs about a half cent each (CDN $$ of course). Cheers, Canuck | |||
|
| one of us |
Hey Canuck, I just disassembled a Remington factory 400 grain Barnes Solid load. It has 78 grains of what appears to be RL-15. With that long shanked monometal bullet the powder was compressed into almost a solid cake. I had to dig it out with a probe. A few of the kernels were crushed flat. I think I'll pull them all and reload with 75 or 76 grains. I'll torch off a couple of factory rounds with the pressure trace hooked up this winter just to see what's what. Someone at the factory had a heavy hand on the hopper  .Thank you for the heads up. JCN | |||
|
| Powered by Social Strata | Page 1 2 |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
The Accurate Reloading Forums THE ACCURATE RELOADING.COM FORUMS Hunting African Big Game Hunting Re: Weight and Capacity Of Our 416 Rem and 404 Brass
Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia
| View $GS_USERNAME's Public Profile |
| Add $GS_USERNAME to my Buddies |
| Add $GS_USERNAME to my Ignore List |
| Invite $GS_USERNAME to a Private Topic |
| View Recent Posts by $GS_USERNAME |
| Notify me of New Posts by $GS_USERNAME |