I just purchased another version of a Whelen AI. This particular cartridge has been blown out and the shoulder pushed forward to where there is only .280" of neck. There is .014" of body taper, and rim to body/shoulder transition point is 2.100", leaving .100" for neck-to-shoulder length.

The rifle came with approximately six boxes of loaded ammunition, mostly 225-grain Accubonds, but he also had some Hornady 250-grain RNs loaded. He used IMR 4895: 61 grains for the ABs, 60 grains for the Hornady RNs. I have fired some of both of these loads, and they group MOA or just a bit above @ 100 with a straight 6X. Recoil is actually quite pleasant.

My question is this: the loads he has worked up look prety hot based on standard Whelen data, but bolt lift and ejection are normal, there is minimal case expansion forward of the web, and primers are "flat" but not bradded.

To those of you who have played with a Whelen AI, do these loads sound too hot? I have to admit, I am very new at wildcats and I don't trust the chronograph I own, so I haven't clocked them.

For me the key test is:

Can I reload this case three times with the same load and still have a good fit in the primer/primer pocket on the last loading. If the answer is yes then the load is OK for this lot of brass and current components.

If the answer is NO....then back off at least two grains and try again.

quote:

Originally posted by vapodog:
For me the key test is:

Can I reload this case three times with the same load and still have a good fit in the primer/primer pocket on the last loading. If the answer is yes then the load is OK for this lot of brass and current components.

Sage advice there, Vapo. There is no such thing as a modern turnbolt rifle on which the action is not far stronger than the brass. So long as the brass is in no danger of letting go, then the load is, by definition, "safe". A load that allows brass to endure the same load three loadings in a row and still has so little head expansion that the primer pocket is tight is a load that is well within appropriate pressure parameters.

What has been said so far seems correct for what you have loaded, its OAL?? and the pressure indications you are getting.

With that blowen out short necked wildcat there is an important consideration to be made when loading long bullets; Adequate magazine length and throat depth, yeilding a long COAL or OAL as you may choose.


For example; If the bullet is only seated so the base is in line with the neck -shoulder junction the loads of what you speak are probably just fine. If a max. OAL of 3.340" has to be held (magazine length or and throat depth) that load well could yield brass distorting pressures.

JMHO; If that were my new rifle I would start reloading with powders with slow burning rates like H-380 or H-414. Once enough confidence and understanding is built up the faster and slower powders can be worked up.

If you have a little bit too much 4831 it's different than a little bit too much of 4895 .
I hope I haven't confused you roger

Just as a reference point you might want to compare your case shape and capacity to the 358 Hawk.

Z-hat has loads equal or greater for the 358 on their sight. http://www.z-hat.com/358%20Hawk%20Ballistics.htm

quote:

Z-hat has loads equal or greater for the 358 on their sight

Their loads may or may not be achievable in someone els's gun. IMO they must be taken as an absolute max in the best circumstances.

the good news: their is NO risk in beating a dead horse. It is, however, about as rational as arguing with your wife!
Vapodog's assessment, +1

Rich
DRSS
Knowledge not shared is knowledge lost...

Vapo Recommends 3 reloads with tight primer pockets..

I never recommend a load unless I have loaded it 5 times and the primer pockets are still tight on the 6th time...then I call it safe..

we all have different criteria.. but Vapos are no less safe than my way either.. some of us just try and go even further in our margins of safety....

but once you have done what you feel comfortable with.. don't listen to everyone else's BS about you are going to kill someone..

I was going to say 10 reloads, but Im a chicken shit!
That neck config might work out just great with 225g, a very sane choice for much of what the Whelen is good for.
If the bolt lifts fine and the primers look unabused, they ought to be safe enough to fire five rounds, and reload those cases a few times to make you feel safe. If it was much less than 6 full boxes, Id just as soon pull the bullets and work up my own loads. A big part of the fun of getting a new rifle, IMO.

Thanks, guys... The question in no way meant I won't work up loads. I have been handloading for over 20 years, and I am itching to do some workup with this rifle when time permits. I was just curious as to what you fellows thought, because the load seemed a long way above standard Whelen data to only expect another 50-75 fps, as most of the "ink" on here says.

And Bartsche, COL with the boattailed AB is 3.300", which means .545" of the 1.370" bullet is inside. The entire boattailed portion of the bullet extends beyond the base of the neck. I haven't yet checked COL with the bullet pushed into the lands, but you can bet it will be a reference number only.

I suspect I will be burning Accurate's XMR-4064 in this rifle soon enough, at least to check groups. Velocity is somewhat secondary, but I do have a late season desert elk tag in Idaho. It would be nice to fill it with this new rifle...

I just checked the rifle for a "hard against the lands" COL. I come up with 3.615" for the Accubond. That tells me the previous owner had .3" of freebore loaded into these rounds. Now I REALLY wonder what it will do for accuracy if I reduce the bullet jump.

Time to go to the range!

quote:

Originally posted by Doubless:
I just checked the rifle for a "hard against the lands" COL. I come up with 3.615" for the Accubond. That tells me the previous owner had .3" of freebore loaded into these rounds. Now I REALLY wonder what it will do for accuracy if I reduce the bullet jump.!

Sounds like the guy who built it knew what he was doing. will the magazine accommodate the long col? If so I think you have a winner. roger