THE ACCURATERELOADING.COM FORUMS


Moderators: Mark
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
Velocity differences ?????
 Login/Join
 
Gustavo
one of us
Picture of Gustavo
posted
A friend of mine, bought a couple of weeks ago a brand new Marlin 1895SS, .45-70 Govt.

We started developing some loads for it using 58gr of A27 ( a locally made powder, close to IMR 3031 ) with Speer 350gr FN.

In almost every test we run, always extreme spreads of about 150 to 200 fps were present [Confused]

Any hint of why this could be happening ??

Load consisted of :

58gr A27
350gr Speer FN
OAL, as per specification
Crimp, tight using Lee Factory Crimp die

Never before I experienced this "extreme" spreads in velocity!!!

By the way, this powder (and charge) seems to be max, since from 56 to 58 gr the velocities were no climbing, almost nothing... lying flat.
 
Posts: 748 | Location: Buenos Aires, Argentina | Registered: 14 January 2001Reply With Quote
m700
one of us
posted Hide Post
Gustavo, couple of things that might cause the problem:

Speer say's their 350 grainer isn't built right for the Marlin .45-70.

Their manual states: "The 350 grain Speer Hot-Cor, designed for the .458 Winchester Magnum, cannot be seated to function properly through most lever-action rifles."

I know guys who do it anyway, but it takes a little work to do so. Easier to just buy the Hornady 350 flat point, which was built for the Marlin lever action in the first place. This leads to the second point.

The second point worth considering is that the .45-70 seems very sensitive to a proper, heavy, crimp. Too light a crimp can lead to inconsistent ignition/powder burn. I'm not familiar with your powder, but I've seen big variations when the .45-70 isn't crimped well. Not as much as you describe though. Consider the Lee Factory Crimp die - it's very popular with Marlin .45-70 lever gun shooters.

Hope this helps, Guy
 
Posts: 327 | Location: Washington State, USA | Registered: 18 July 2002Reply With Quote
Savage99
one of us
posted Hide Post
Maybe the powder does not ignite well with that expansion ratio. Anyway "3031" is slow for that cartridge. Try some 4198 or magnum primers.
 
Posts: 5543 | Registered: 09 December 2002Reply With Quote
Gustavo
one of us
Picture of Gustavo
posted Hide Post
All the loads were heavy crimped with a Lee Factory crimp die.

Do you think that going to a magnum primer will change things ??

Is it possible to have a problem in the rifle itself ??

Tks for the ideas!
 
Posts: 748 | Location: Buenos Aires, Argentina | Registered: 14 January 2001Reply With Quote
<MePlat>
posted
GUSTAVO: This may or may not help. Load the 350 Speer to 2.540" OAL and turn the case into the curve of the ogive. Use a powder that will give you a compressed load that is just short of starting to deform the nose of the bullet. Hodgodons H322 is an excellent powder for this also Hodgdons 4895. With H322 start with 53 gr and work up to 200 fps or so. With H4895 start with57 and go up to 200 fps or so with it. If you can't get these powders use the equivalent in your powders in burn rate.H322 ids close to 3031 and H4895 is slightly slower. The compressed load keeps the bullet in place under recoil.. This is the same practice Bufalo Bore uses in their factory loads with the 350 gr Speer bullet and it works. Also Accurate Arms 2015 is good. Use the same data for the H322. It may even get higher velocity than the other two.

[ 02-23-2003, 07:14: Message edited by: MePlat ]
 
Reply With Quote
Wstrnhuntr
One of Us
Picture of Wstrnhuntr
posted Hide Post
Speer claims that the Lee factory crimp is detrimental to their bullets, Lee also mentions this in their data just for good measure, CYB syndrome. That may or may not be significant to your plight.
 
Posts: 10160 | Location: Tooele, Ut | Registered: 27 September 2001Reply With Quote
ricciardelli
one of us
Picture of ricciardelli
posted Hide Post
Gustavo,

Do you have a powder down there equivalent to IMR-4198? If so, try loading between 49.0 and 53.3 grains. No magnum primer required, but a good crimp is.

Oh, and when are you going to come out with an update to your program?
 
Posts: 3282 | Location: Saint Marie, Montana | Registered: 22 May 2002Reply With Quote
<PaulS>
posted
Gus,
If you got no or very little increase in velocity when loading from 56 to 58 then I would assume that 56 was maximum and the load was developing pressure spikes that was causing your velocity fluctuations - Try taking the load down to 54 and see what happens. Then work it up in .2 grain increments to find the most accurate load - After finding the load that is accurate THEN chronograph it to find out what the SD and ES is.

PaulS
 
Reply With Quote
m700
one of us
posted Hide Post
Gustavo, By the way, I'm getting good accuracy with Remington's bulk 405 grain bullets and 47 grains of Reloader 7. Can you get Alliant powders? I use Winchester brass and standard CCI 200 primers. Also have used Federal 210's. I don't see any need to go with a magnum primer in this cartridge. Regards, Guy
 
Posts: 327 | Location: Washington State, USA | Registered: 18 July 2002Reply With Quote
Gustavo
one of us
Picture of Gustavo
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by ricciardelli:
Gustavo,

Do you have a powder down there equivalent to IMR-4198? If so, try loading between 49.0 and 53.3 grains. No magnum primer required, but a good crimp is.

Oh, and when are you going to come out with an update to your program?
Unfortunatey, we don't have any local powder close to IMR-4198, in fact A27 is slighty lower than 3031.

But of course, I can get a can of 4198 and see what happens!

Regarding the program... exactly waht you guys would like to see in an update ?? let me know!

Regards, Gus
 
Posts: 748 | Location: Buenos Aires, Argentina | Registered: 14 January 2001Reply With Quote
Savage99
one of us
posted Hide Post
Gustavo,

I just used your program moments ago to run a comparison to the .223, 223 I and 22/250. Your exterior ballistics work sheet is the best one.

Just to drop a note that we appreciate what you have provided and to say a thank you.
 
Posts: 5543 | Registered: 09 December 2002Reply With Quote
Gustavo
one of us
Picture of Gustavo
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Savage99:
Gustavo,

I just used your program moments ago to run a comparison to the .223, 223 I and 22/250. Your exterior ballistics work sheet is the best one.

Just to drop a note that we appreciate what you have provided and to say a thank you.
Savage99, thanks very much for your encouraging words! its from that feedback that I take my stamina to further develop the program.

Again, let me know what would you like to see in an update, and I'll do my best!
 
Posts: 748 | Location: Buenos Aires, Argentina | Registered: 14 January 2001Reply With Quote
Savage99
one of us
posted Hide Post
Gus,

Your LoadBase program is excellent for me as I use the IMR powders for the most part and the Powley formula is adequate there.

I think you should charge for your program! I have a number of them now and just like another rifle there seems to be no limit. It's a lot of work to create and maintain one I bet. I got the "Calculator" program and found many tiny things that need adjusting in it and that has still not happened to the best of my knowledge.

I don't like to bring up unhappy topics but make sure that you are covered for liablity. Perhaps this has been you plan all along as the Powley is freeware. Just be aware however that some of the BC data in your program is not correct. In this area I don't have a clue as to what I am talking about but I do have that concern for you.

Sincerely

Don
 
Posts: 5543 | Registered: 09 December 2002Reply With Quote
<eldeguello>
posted
If A27 is actually a little slower than 3031, then it must be a lot like 4895 or 4064. I have had excellent results with 3031 in the .45/70 as have many people, ever since it was first introduced. RE 7 also works well for me, but I have never tried IMR 4198 in anything except reduced cast bullet loads in the 30/'06.
 
Reply With Quote
Hot Core
one of us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Gustavo:
In almost every test we run, always extreme spreads of about 150 to 200 fps were present [Confused]

Any hint of why this could be happening ??
Hey Gus, The answer is so obvious, I'm a bit surprised that "you" even asked the question.

Did you not use "your" Scientific Method?

quote:
Originally posted by Gustavo:
I suggest the following, in my humble opinion :

1) Create a solid theoretical foundation of the principles involved
2) Test the math model
3) Go to the lab
4) Use rest, many different components combination
5) Measure barrel vibration
6) Use lasers and high speed cameras
7) Spend a lot of money
8) After that...
9) Go back to the lab!!!

When finished, publish your results, not mere speculation and field experiences...
 
Posts: 9920 | Location: Carolinas, USA | Registered: 22 April 2001Reply With Quote
ricciardelli
one of us
Picture of ricciardelli
posted Hide Post
Gustavo,

"Again, let me know what would you like to see in an update, and I'll do my best!"

I would like a tanned-skin beauty (female) around 30-years-old, brown hair and eyes, 5'8" tall and around 130 pounds.

Can you do that?
 
Posts: 3282 | Location: Saint Marie, Montana | Registered: 22 May 2002Reply With Quote
Gustavo
one of us
Picture of Gustavo
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by ricciardelli:
Gustavo,

"Again, let me know what would you like to see in an update, and I'll do my best!"

I would like a tanned-skin beauty (female) around 30-years-old, brown hair and eyes, 5'8" tall and around 130 pounds.

Can you do that?
Steve... well... THAT's EXACTLY what I got to myself, coupled with beatifull green eyes !! [Big Grin]

Sorry, but don't have at hand another one!
 
Posts: 748 | Location: Buenos Aires, Argentina | Registered: 14 January 2001Reply With Quote
  Powered by Social Strata  
 


Copyright December 1997-2023 Accuratereloading.com


Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia