Aladin or any one else experienced with cast bullets at 600 yds.

I am looking for information on bullet yaw and bullet drift at longer ranges. Somewhat oval shaped bullet holes at 600 yards all indicate a bit of yaw starting. Is my bullet running out of steam / stability?

Accuracy does not seem to be lacking as the hits were good within my limitations. Three of my first five hits were within a half minute of angle the other two of these five were a couple of inches apart but grouped about a foot lower. I'm still working on getting my sight picture and hold a bit more consistant.

I'm shooting an original 1896 30-40 Krag rifle that I've added a "no gunsmithing" type Redfield Target Peep to.

My 600 yard range consists of a 5'x5' target frame with a 36 inch bull on the side of a black lava rock mountain. It's a bit of a run with the 4X4 to check the target.

My load is 52 gr of WC872 with a 311284 Lyman of WW + 1% tin + 10% shot, heat treated to BHN 20-22. Weight with gas check & lube is 224 gr. Velocities run 1990-2000 fps.

With this slow powder I might squeeze a bit more powder in and maybe come up with 2050-2100 fps and still be safe but I don't want to stress the old soldier.

I had a 10 mph wind going right to left from the right rear quarter, I could barely feel it on my face but it was constant. My first shots were high and left on the target and I had to dial in 7 minutes of right windage to bring my hits to the center (1-X, 1-10, 1-8 and 2-7's on center). The front sight is a bit rounded and may be part of the reason the group was not tighter. Of course the other part is my spastic sight alignment, trigger control etc.

The 7 minutes (42"?)of windage seemed a bit much for the wind, is bullet drift also at play here?

Any thoughts on bullet yaw or drift would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks, Have Fun, JCherry

JCherry all sounds well with your shooten. If you run the '284 in a ballistic calculator is shows 68" of wind drift using a 10 mph wind from a full value angle-- exactly rt to left or reversed. These numbers using your loading data.

If memory serves correct, the '284 is 1.27" in length with a check seated. Now-- the 30/40's original loading a 220 gr'r at around 2000 fps methinks, the '284 likely a close copy of it. So twist is fine.

Your bullet is going trans-sonic between 5 and 600 yds-- if that's a factor I dunno. Doubt it, I think some of that ovalness is due to trajectory-- that slug coming in from a fairly steep angle. Nothing like a 45/70 though. So-- what dia bullet are you using?

That's some fine shooten BTW. Fun isn't it.. launching them things down there. I used to just chuckle at first. My loading is 19.5 grs of Blue Dot with 170 gr LBT spitzers going around 1975 ish. Of late I've used just air cooled [AC'd] and aged bullets. Mention such cause I shot '329's AC'd at 600 and they did quite well and normally I treat them. My '03 is .307 too.

How does your sight setting match to what's calibrated on the staff?

I used a BC of .355 for your bullet BTW.

Ballistic Calculator

I shoot the 284 in my Krag too. One of the most accurate rifles I've ever seen. Gotta love those Krags. That's some damn good shooting you have done with yours. The farthest I've shot mine so far is 200 meters and it shoots mighty fine. One of my favorite rifles by the way.

Joe

Aladin,

After I finished my post I uncovered some old military wind tables for the 174(?) grain match cartridge in 308 at around 2600 fps. It gave the correction for a 10 mph wind from 5 O'clock as being about 28" of windage. I figured with my slow velocity & round nosed bullet that the amount of correction I used made more sense.

I also forgot to mention that I shot at about 0900 so the sun was a bit low to my right and there may have been some effect from that. I forget which way sunlight on the front sight is supposed to effect sighting but I know it can. I did blacken the front sight with soot.

The diameter of my bullet is .311 my bore measurement is .309 x .301.

You are right about the 311284 being a close match to the original bullet. What I have been doing to set my Redfield peep sight is to raise the original sight to the desired elevation and then set the peep by looking through both sights at the same time. For some reason I'd gotten the idea that the sights were off by about 25 yards and today when I set the sights I set the original sights for 625. My hits were high and I would have been closer to have set them right on at 600. As it was it got me on paper right away.

Wow, I checked out the ballistic calculator you referenced and plugged in the data for my load, 2000fps, 224 wt, .309 diameter etc. I also plugged in the wind at 135 degrees instead of 090 and the correction came out to 48". The calculator assigned a BC of 335 for my round nose bullet. I have added that calculator to my favorites.

The long range stuff is fun. I have not shot 600 yards with cast before, our range is not really set up for much beyond 400 yards. I have shot out to 600 before in some highpower shoots several years back with M1 Garands.

One thing which does tickle me to no end is taking my Krag or 03 to the range and watching the kids with their Ultra Mags with scopes struggling to make hits of any kind. I then take my "Old obsolete military garbage" and make the gongs ring. It's really funny to watch the wonderment as they ask how did you do that?

One kid (co-worker) had it in his mind that he was going to hunt White tail here in Arizona at long range with a 25-06. He had it at the range shooting at 400 yards and was coming up with "shotgun" patterns because of gusty ten mph winds and 120 grain bullets.

The kid had a Remington 30-06 semi-auto for which he had 180 grain loads and I asked him why he didn't use it for 400 yards as the bullet would buck the wind better. He replied that he had heard that semi-autos were not accurate at long ranges and it probably was not worth trying. I asked him what he thought an M1 Garand was. I got him to try the semi with the 180 grain loads and you should have seen the look on his face when he started shooting good groups at 400. He did get his deer at 400 yards. He used a lazer range finder. I know most would figure he was telling stories but this kid is a good one and if he said he got it at that range I believe him especially as he had the lazer with him.

I've been wandering more than I meant to. Sorry about that. I do enjoy the long range shooting especially with cast bullets. I'll stop worrying about the little oval holes as long as they are going where they should and concentrate on my sight alinement and trigger control and try for 10 in the 10 ring at 600.

One last thing, you mentioned you were using the 311329. I had heard somewhere that bullets of this design were prone to being inaccurate at higher velocities because the long unsupported nose would slump. I take it from your shooting that this is not the case. What is the weight and BC of the 329.

Thanks for the info.

Have Fun, JCherry

Starmetal,

What load are you using with your Krag / 284 bullet. What variation of the Krag are you shooting? It is a neat piece of quality equipment.

You've got to try it at long range its a hoot, you pull the trigger, sit back, and wait for the gong to ring.

Have Fun, JCherry

I have an 1898 Model full lenght rifle uncut. Got it from my Dad. Mostly I shoot the 311284 out of it but have also shot the 314299 with equally good results. I have used a variety of medium to slow burning rifle powders. I'm not one to use a small dose of fast burning pistol powder, just don't like to for some reason. I remember when I had some H870. I had good result with it out of my 30-06 so tried it in the Krag. It worked great in it. What I liked about it was it filled the case up and didn't have to use a filler or tilt the gun up to position the powder before shooting. Another powder that shot very well was H414. I had bought it for supposely better and faster loads in my 7mm-08 but my particular rifle didn't like that powder so I ended up using it in the Krag. Most people won't believe it but I have been able to shoot 1 inch groups with my Krag at 100 yds with that 284 cast bullet. Currently I got a jug of surplus 844 and am shooting that and it's not too bad. My Krag's bore is also .309 x .301. I use to to shoot using the little flip up peep sight on it but man is the hole in that very very small. Unless it was a very bright day with very bright background (like say white paper with a black bullseye) you can't see well through it. What the devil where their intentions for such a fine hole? It shoots just about as well with the just the front blade and rear U notch. We got a friend of mine a krag like mine and my cast shoot the same out his as they do mine. It leads me to the impression that just about all the krags are fine shooters. Makes me wonder, is it the Krag itself, or is it just the cartridge? Would the 30-40 shoot as well as it does in the Krag shoot as well in another bolt gun?

Joe

"One last thing, you mentioned you were using the 311329. I had heard somewhere that bullets of this design were prone to being inaccurate at higher velocities because the long unsupported nose would slump. I take it from your shooting that this is not the case. What is the weight and BC of the 329"

Mine goes say 187 grs. But mine is recut.. making that bore ride zone a full .125" driver at .309

The old slump adage is nonsense. Yes it could using a soft alloy of lead, but any bullet design at the same pressures and alloy would. My last run was as I said air cooled and they shot very well at 600. I had a group cluster of around 14" with maybe 7-8 rds in shooten a dark day with an aimpt too small for consistency. And my bullet QC was been downgraded-- too much time and the he** with it. If it passes otta the mold most likely it gets a trip now...

I think I feel a spitzer thread comin' on..

STARMETAL,

I also don't care for the fast burning pistol powder, and do lean strongly toward the slow powders. The perception I have is that full cases lead to a more consistant ignition and burn which gives lower standard deviations and better accuracy.

What overall cartridge length are you useing with your 284. Mine is at 3.10" which just kisses the forcing cone with a .311 bullet but will still function through my magazine. I may just try to "Beagle" my mould out to .312 to see if it makes any difference.

My rifle will also do 1" groups if I do my part. I seem to be having trouble with my hold or my sight alignment that leads to what I'll call double grouping. With one string of shots I'll have several grouped a bit high and several a bit low. One reason for this I'm sure is the cover over our range is made up of slats so I tend to vary my position slightly "chasing" the shade over my front sight. I wish I could get or have made a front sight cover for my Krag like the cover available for the 03.

I know what you mean about the flip up peep. My rifle was updated some where in the past and it also has the 1902? version of sights. The peep is tiny but is capable of very fine accuracy. The fine hole must be for target shooting / sniping. Most of the users of the weapon would have been those with "young" eyes capable of using such fine sights.

As far as being fine shooters I think it is a combination of overall quality and design of the Krag system. If we are able to do what we are doing now with the Krag just think what they would have been capable of over 100 years ago when they were new and tight.

My Grandfather was in the Phillipines in 1901 and is said to have been a sharpshooter. He died long before I was born, sure would have been nice to discuss Krags with him. I have his old photo album from the Phillipines, the detail of the old photos is phenominal. One added benefit for me with the 1896 Krag I have is that it is not inconcievable that my Grandfather could have carried this particular weapon.

ALADIN,

You did not mention the BC of the 329, I'll bet it's a good one.

I'm not sure if I follow what you mean about your mold being recut. Is the nose like that of the 311334? or did you add a "driving band"?

I'd figured from some of your past posts that the old slump adage was nonsense. I've not had any experience other than the 311334 so I'll just monitor the impending "Spitzer Thread.

On my QC I've noticed that occasionally I'll have bullets where the bands are not completely filled out because of either trapped air or the mold not being at the right temperature. I've found that these don't open up the groups significantly but I do mark them as plinkers just in case. Most are completely filled out and I mark them separately. Most of mine also get a trip but I'm still working on increasing the number of top notch bullets.

Have Fun, JCherry

I gotta agree with the full case/slow powder argument--in both the 30-06 and 45-70 (talk about going from the sublime to ridiculous!) full cases of WC-860 have resulted in decent accuracy and SMALL sd's--single digit in the 45-70.

I do use partial case loads too--18.0 grains of 2400 does very good things in the 9.3 x 62/270 Mtn Mold FN--but a full case of WC-860 did all right, too. I think it's time to scope that CZ-550 and see just what it can do when the considerable handicap of its operator's eyesight is minimized through magnification.

Deputy...I have a CZ 550 in 30-06 and it's scoped. Mainly bought it for a deer rifle but tried cast out of it one day. It shot cast better then I have been able to shoot jacketed out of it so far. And the bullet it shoots the best surprised me. I tried the 311284 in it and it shoots it very well but it's the 314299 that is the real surprise. Sized to .310 over 30 grains of surplus 844 with kapok filler it shoots a ragged 3/4 hole at 100 yds. I'm very pleased with those results. My eye too are bad and find myself going to scopes more.

Joe

Deputy Al,

"considerable handicap of its operator's eyesight is minimized through magnification" LOL!!!

I think I'm familiar with that condition it's known as the "OSB Syndrome" OLD SHAKEY & BLIND, It's most common amoung those who are burned out and ready to pull the plug.

How's your short timers calendar doing? Is that a helmet with freyed woodland camo sitting on top of a pair of worn out boots on your desk?

I'm still looking hard at April of 04 but did some recalculations and it may be better for me to "optimize my high-3" by going till April of 05. It will increase my retirment by $100 to $200 a month and I still have to maintain the little lady in the manner to which she has become accustomed. Hope I can make it.

I should have done like the old Border Patrol Agent out in west Texas did years ago. Married a Mexican girl from way down in the interior of Mexico, she'd grown up with no electric or running water. Well he bought an old ranch house in a remote area with electric & running water gave her a washing machine, electric lights but no TV, telephone etc. and lived happier that a pig in sh**.

We picked up a load a week or so ago of 5,400 lbs, four stolen crew cab pickups w/camper shells, caught four of eight subjects involved. Used the Blackhawk, ATV's - teeth hair & eyeballs as they were slam dunked in a cloud of dust, ALL KINDS OF FUN!! ----- then the paperwork - God Save Us.

Part of my unit was called to assist (I held down the fort.) with the wetback shootings south of Phoenix last week to help track down all the wets that scattered in the desert after the shooting. It's not getting any kinder & gentler out here.

Even if I decide to go another year I'll try to make the 04 shoot. I got to get up there & meet you guys even if we do have to shoot by braille because of the OSB Syndrome.

Have Fun, JCherry

Yes the bore ride is now a driver area, as mentioned .125" of linear length at .309 in my alloy. Tom Meyers figured that bullet at .429 but I'd say it's a bit higher.

One of the cavity-otts of the as original cut '329s was the bore ride was usually under .300 diameter. With no throat to bullet contact or alignment per a rider accuracy isn't as good as with contact. But that applies to any design.

The bullet I'm proposing on the spitzer thread should well exceed .500 BC

[ 11-11-2003, 00:20: Message edited by: aladin ]

I`m inclined to agree that the `ol Krag is a great rifle. My 1896 hasn`t been to the range often, but with lino/ww and a full charge of IMR4350, it shoots to the "battle sight" at 200yds. I`ve only tried the Saeco RG4 and the Loverin 311467 so far but it does very well as far as I`m concerned. Only wish it did not have a shortened stock...I`d really like to return it to it`s original condition.
It`s "low" number (42XX) intrigued me, until I checked it`s history. None the less, it sits next to my `03`s, another fine rifle...

I was discussing putting an '03 sight on my Buff last yr or so. Consenus was to get a Krag sight for ease of windage adjustments. You guys that have experience with both guns might give me some insight as to those sights and merits of each please.

For sure it'd take some creative smithing to do such. I thought attaching that sight to a scope base??

Thanks.

Aladin,

There are several variations of the Krag rifle sights. Basically there are two types;

One is a ladder type, the 1901 type which is very simular to the 1903 Springfield. I have heard that the O'Niel sight micrometer can be used on the ladder types for setting elevation.

The other is the 1898 & 1902 types which has a tangent. The 1902 version is apparently the version that Starmetal and I both have on our weapon. These versions have a "flip up" peep which is capable of very fine accuracy but good eyes are required. I like this version but as Starmetal said the peep is very small.

There is also the 1896 version which is half tangent and half ladder sight? I've not actually seen any sights other than the 1902 type so my descriptions may not be correct.

I believe all except the 1892 version have provisions for windage adjustments.

The book, The American Krag Rifle and Carbine" by Joe Poyer has very good photos and descriptions of the Krag sights.

Also take a look at:

www.kragcollectorsassociation.com/photos.htm

I can not give any advice on method of attachment to your rifle.

Have Fun, JCherry