Just cut and crowned the wife's '06 to 19", shortened the stock etc. Question is--is there a rule of thumb regarding working up reloads for shorter barrelled rifles? I assume faster powders are preferred--for her, muzzle blast is a real issue (it's now 19" because we had to remove the factory brake.) The .06 isn't probably the best caliber but I had it in the rack, she liked it and she needed something adequate for elk. Any help with getting her a reasonably efficient load for this rig would be great!

I have used imr 3031 for years with superb accuracy. A friend is shooting his 30/06 now with the 180 gr bullet and is using that powder.

He is using 46.0 grains and that comes close to 2700 fps in a regular bbl. His groups are so good that he is not going to change that load no matter what.

We know that if you stuff the case with 7828 or R-22 the velocity will be higher regardless of bbl lenght but so will the recoil and blast be much greater. Remember that the formula for recoil counts the powder as 1.5 times it's weight.

Consider the 165 gr bullet. The recoil will be a little lighter with them. Then 48 grains of 3031 will do it and the velocity and therefore the trajectory will be better. These loads are for modern 30/06's and commercial brass.

[ 06-23-2002, 19:49: Message edited by: Don Martin29 ]

I use Bal-c 2 out of my 18.5 custom o3. But boy it is sure loud. I prefer longer barrels now.

Snowcat:

I use AA2520 high end published loads in my Remington 760 30-06 with good results. If you're looking to use it for elk, using a heavy bullet with a lighter powder charge may take some of the blast/flash out. Still, the light show will be impressive with what every powder you choose, just the nature of the beast.

Ryan

Fishin for shortcuts I guess--the 3031 load will get tried this week. I was thinking of the rl-15 or 4198 road also but I'm still a little hesitant to strike out on my own without the guides. What about Varget?? Hell on wheels with my 22-50 and BR's. I guess it all comes down to minimizing what she doesn't like about hunting so that we can enjoy the rest of it. You know you picked well when the new wife starts to drop hint's about one of your rifles. Plus she draws any damn tag she (I) puts in for--hell if I can though. Anyway, thanks for the help. I'll keep you posted.

There is a widely held misconception that shortening a rifle barrel requires one to use faster powders to optimize performance. This, in rifle-length barrels, is NOT TRUE!! Any powder that gives a maximum velocity performance with a given bullet weight with a 24" barrel will also do so if you cut your barrel to 19"!! Why?? because it is the ("slower") powder's ability to maintain higher pressures throughout the bullet's travel down the bore that gives the velocity results. In order for a faster burnming powder to give you higher muzzle velocities with the shorter tube, you would have to markedly increase the maximum pressure levels of the load!! Since this is not something you can safely do, THERE IS NO WAY A FASTER POWDER CAN GIVE HIGHER VELOCITIES IN A SHORT BARREL THAN A SLOWER POWDER THAT GIVES HIGHER SPEEDS IN A LONGER ONE!! BUT, you will get moe muzzle flash and blast with the slow powder, because muzzle pressure is still high!! If you go to a faster powder to reduce flash and blast, it might do this for you, but at a cost in ballistic performance.

Eldeguello, you are right of course. But if you have a Stutzen, 20 ", and reload, the recipes with 3031, 4895 and 2520 ( ball! temperature sensitive and because of enough case space not necessary ) are right on. Perhaps this will be something of a mixture .30-06/.308, but there will be less flash and a little bit less recoil and the game will never know the difference ...

Hermann

Hey snowcat, Looks like you are getting some fairly good advice from the previous posters.

I'd recommend you try to stick with "Single Base" powders if you are interested in holding down muzzle flash. As far as a specific powder, you will just have to try a few and see which ones your rifle likes.

See if you can get her used to hunting while wearing Sonic Ear Valves (now owned by Silencio). I have to wear them with some of my short barrel rifles. They work extremely well and only cost $7-$9.

If she is recoil sensitive, use something like a FailSafe or a BarnesX in a 165gr weight. If she isn't recoil sensitive, nearly any 180gr bullet will work well if placed in the "front 1/3" of the Elk. People that feel it is OK to shoot at the "Wrong End" or OK to take "Gut Shots" are better served with heavy Premium bullets.

And for ABSOLUTELY SURE, put a Pachmayer Decellerator pad on the stock for her. I'd forgotten how well they actually reduce the perceived recoil until I got a new rifle earlier this year. If you doubt it, find someone with a rifle/shotgun that has one on it and fire it yourself - outstanding! There are some "tricks" to mounting them, but you can get all the scoop from the Pachmayer Customer Service guys.

Sounds like a fine project to help the lady afield.

Snowcat,
I've hunted your area for many years. I had an 06 in Win. 70. ( pre-64). That rifle liked 165g Hornady spirepoints with 57g of IMR 4831. The last critter I killed in your neck of the woods was a 6'3 blk. bear up Kraft Cr. Rd. with my Whelen. ( I turned my 06 Win into a Whelen). I've taken lots of game with that 06 rifle in it's heyday. With a short barrel that rifle would make a good "truck gun" with either a 4 or 6 power scope. Due to a lot of brush on the Swan and Clearwater River bottom, I myself would go to a 180 or 200g bullet since most of your shots would be less than 100 yards. When I pass thru to Kalispell, I always have a cool one at "Liquid Louie's". I shoot a lot of "road chickens" in your neck of the woods as well....

My experience is the opposite of eldeguello's (and John Barsness').

When I bought my Rem. 760 carbine in '06, I started with loads in most of my powders that were supposed to produce about the same velocities (about 2500 fps with 180 gr bullets as I recall). The poorest performers were the slow burners (4831, W760, etc.) and the best were the medium burn rate powders (W748, 4320, 4064, etc.).

I began working from there, and ended up with IMR 4320 as the powder I chose. I can't recall exactly, but I believe I was using around 48.5 grains to get 2639 fps.

Rick, I understand that the medium burners gave you better performance in your carbine, but do you attribute this to the fact that the barrel was short? Or could it have been the case that your rifle would have done better with those powders even if the barrel were a couple of inches longer? Remember, National Match .30/'06 loads were loaded with 4895 (and other similar burning-rate powders) before the advent of the M1 National Match rifle. Also, several manuals seem to indicate that 4320 is very close to optimum for 150 and 180 grain loads in the '06.

Eldeguello:

When I first bought my previous 30-06, I graphed several different factory loads in its 22" barrel, and they all came out at about 2600 fps. I haven't tested any in the carbine (yet) but now that you've given me the idea, I plan to. However, since most test rifles are equipped with 26" barrels, it is clear to me that a shorter barrel means less velocity in this cartridge (all other factors being equal).

My previous rifle was an autoloader, and my deer load was 47.2 grains of 4320 for 2471 fps. The carbine graphed this load at 2470 fps.

I always used a medium burn rate powder in the auto, because of jamming prioblems with slower burn rate powders, but I could never get much more than 2600 fps out of these powders.

I tried one 4831 load that was supposed to give 2650 fps in the carbine, and it barely graphed 2400 fps.

Until I see a clear indication to the contrary, I will likely continue on the basis that slow burning powders are inefficient in short barrels.

Rick

Rick, if by "inefficient" you mean that one gets more velocity per grain of powder burned from the medium-burning powders than from the slow burners in a .30/'06 case, you are absolutely correct. The point I am making is that powders that maintain higher pressures throughout the bullet's travel through the bore deliver higher muzzle velocities than ones which lose pressure sooner. Basic physics dictates this, and it cannot be otherwise!! However, this is only true if both powders are loaded to equal PEAK pressure levels. If your slow powder loads give lower peak pressures than your medium burning loads, then the results may very well be different, and in line with what you have discovered with your short barrels.

By removing the muuzzle brake, you will of course be increasing the felt recoil considerably.

I've been testing 165 and 180 grain loads in a Remington 700 BDL, and am sorely reminded of the recoil potential of a lightweight 30-06. I've shot .300 Win Mags that felt better, probably due to the overall weight of the rifle and the recoil pad (which my rifle doesn't currently have).

I have noted no difference in felt recoil between the 165's and the 180's. The best load I've found for the 165's is 57.5 grains of H4350, and this same charge of powder pushes the 180's really well, with superb accuracy. The 4831's are too slow for optimal performance in this chambering. (Check your loading manuals and you'll see what I mean). You can go up to 59 grains of H4350 with the 165's, but I found very consistent accuracy at 57.5 grains. IMR 4350 works well also, but you'll want to load a little lighter than the above numbers with the IMR as it burns a little faster. 56 grains with the 180, and 57 with the 165's...

Okay, now this aside:

I know many men, and will include myself, who would find the recoil of an aught-six carbine pretty uncomfortable. Considering that there are other chamberings that will do the same job on elk with less recoil, you may end up purchasing or trading for one such rifle. The .270 Winchester would be a good choice in my opinion. And don't underestimate the 6.5 x 55 Swede. These have an excellent reputation for taking large game (the long, thin bullets really penetrate), and recoil is negligent.

If your wife is like mine, that rifle could jar her teeth loose, rearrange her bones, and knock her cross-eyed and she'd never admit it. Many wonderful women are like that! If you're keen on keeping her interested, a light 30-06 might work against your goal...

Just musings...

Dan Newberry
green 788

Very interesting information, especially the discussion about burn rates vs barrel length. I found that I needed to use AA3100/4831 speed powders in my 06 Ackley but the standard 06 may like the medium rate powders.

She is a real sniper with my 25-06 and has taken several deer and antelope cleanly with it but I really don't think its enough for elk even with an x or partition. I've never owned a .270, is the perceived recoil significantly less? I've already put on a decelerator pad. I might also work up a light load based on the above information, let her practice with that and "slip" her full house cartridges when she's hunting (after I've adjusted the zero.) If she's like me recoil is a non-issue when shooting at game.

Thanks again for all the great information guys--its what makes this wuch a great forum. I'll report the loads/velocities as I work them up.

Larry

I was just playing around with my Accuload program and plugging some numbers into the Internal Ballistics Calculator and noticed a couple of interesting things regarding the discussion of short barrels vs long barrels.

1. All powder/bullet combinations I have played with ACHIEVE PEAK PRESSURE WITHIN 2". (I have lived my life thinking the pressure increased all the way down the barrel. It doesn't by a long shot!)

2. Using the 30/06 example, MOST ACCELLERATION takes place within the first 10" of barrel.

The more you play with the numbers, the more you realize a shorter barrel is not a great handicap.
Regardless, a shorter, lighter, handier, better balanced rifle is (IMHO) a quality worth of sacrificing a few inches of barrel to achieve.

Most shooters will NEVER fire a shot at anything approaching really LONG range for their rifle. Fewer still could hit a long range target regardless of their rifle's barrel length.

The only real complaint for short barrels is noise, IMHO. A .308 or 30/06 with an 18" barrel makes a boom few will forget.

Snow, I tend to agree with Green about a short 30/06 for a woman hunter. Once you start getting up to 165 gr bullets, recoil is noticable and with 180 gr bullets a 30/06 can loosen dentures! I've been an "aught six" guy most of my life and frankly have been kicked worse by 180gr bullet from /06 than the 205 gr bullet! This shouldn't be possible and is likely just a "perceived thing" but the 180gr bullet always seemed to deliver a real blow while the heavier bullets gave a mighty shove.

But anyway, FELT recoil is not strictly a numbers game. How a rifle fits a shooter is a big factor, as is shooting position. Certainly any rifle can be tamed down with anti-recoil enhancements, plus everyone will probably be wearing heavy clothing during elk season.

Since she is such a crack shot with a 25/06, one option might be to leave well enough alone. Load this cartridge with heavy, top quality bullet and YOU hunt with her as a back-up in case an extra shot is necessary.

I'm currently shooting a 270 most of the time and don't consider it much of a "kicker". This is a full size rifle, 24" barrel and probably a good 9 lbs. 270 seems more of a "shover."

If you have any inclination towards a new gun in your inventory, your wife might like the 260 Rem or 7/08 or even the old 7x57. All of these will allow you to move into bigger, more elk-like bullets without a great recoil penalty.

I think I would try to keep her OFF the bench shooting /06. Leaning into a rifle on a bench rest can be a wonderful way to really soak up some punishing recoil whereas normal positions are not so bad.

This is all a subject you and the little woman need to have a frank discussion about. This would be a better course of action than you trying to GUESS what her tolerances and preferances are. Good luck.

In my 18 1/2 inch barreled 06 IMR4064 made the least blast and gave good accuracy/velocity. I tried em all too. The worst muzzle blast offender was H335. 3031 also worked well. Bullet weight is up to you.

snowcat, TO ME, the perceived recoil fo a 130 or 150 grain .270 Win. load is less than that of a 180 or 200 grain .30/'06. However, in 150-grain weight loads, the two are very similar, even though the .270 has a slightly lower potential maximum muzzle velocity in this weight than the '06. Actually, the muzzle velocities of the two are usually about the same when loaded with 150-grain bullets.

Thanks all for the input--Got the decellerator pad on and ran some loads through it. My usual 06 powders (4350, 4831, rl 19 and AA3100) all produced very noticeable blast. Velocities were only off by 75 fps from their prev. levels and accuracy was acceptable though still in need of fine tuning. Funny thing is though the load that had previously produced the best groups with this gun are only ho-hum now affter the cut. Go figure. I played with 4064 and light for caliber 150g barnes X's. Velocity ran in around 2700 but groups were around 2.5 inches. I have never gotten the x's to group in any gun but the partitions have done well. Is the 150 partition sufficient out to 200 yds? I've seen elk do some amazing things when hit and I have tremendous respect for their toughness...anyway--se'll keep at it thanks again for all the help.

Also--does anyone know if the ogive to tip measurement is the same for partitions and ballistic tips--if you find the correct land to ogive length for one bullet, set your seater, will this be the correct seating depth for all bullet types? Seems like it should be. Anyway..

I personally would consider both 4064 and Varget. Both have shot well for me with 150 grainers. That said , I would think about Swift 165 grain Scirroccos or A-Frames. They shoot well in everything I have tried them in. Also never, under any circumstance, let her shoot a big game rifle without hearing protection. Yes, I mean while she is hunting too. Get some of the new game ears or the Tactical 6 or 7's out of Cabelas or bass pro. They take the sting right out of the muzzle blast and may prevent the necessity of removing the muzzle brake. Congratulations on having a woman who will hunt with you. Most only grudgingly put up with their man's nasty, bloody, money wasting hobbies. Good luck. and let us know how you come out. "D"

The ogive (at bore dia.) and seating dies that press near the tip of the bullet will not be the same with all bullets and maybe with none as Dutch discovered here with Nosler ballistic tips.

So set the depth for that bullet from that particular box of bullets to be precise.

A quick a easy way to do that is to seat a bullet way out in a case and force it into the chamber. Then put it back into the die and screw the seating stem down to the new length. Back the case out of the die and turn the stem one more full turn in and lock it. Your all set now and the distance off the lands will be about .015". This is quick and easy to do and requires no extra stuff.

If the problems with "Barnes" X type bullets gets resolved it will be very good for hunting. I think it will happen someday. I wish Nosler or Sierra would get on it.