I did some load testing with my new rifle that I wanted to share given some of the topics of late.

Common factors:

FN Mauser, 404 Jeffery, 24� barrel
New Norma 404 Jeffery cases
Fed 215 Primers
Woodleigh 0.423� Weldcore SN 400gr bullets
(seated to cannelure)
Temp=75�F
Muzzle to chrono distance ~15 feet

I tested three types of powders as they were what we had handy. Each load was individually weighed and then introduced into the case with a funnel�no long drop tubes, etc. All values in feet per second.

IMR 4831:

81 gr: 2101
83 gr: 2173
85 gr: 2237
87 gr: 2294
90 gr: 2354 (slight compression of powder)

H4831SC:

83 gr: 2079
84 gr: 2104
85 gr: 2188
87 gr: 2214
90 gr: 2265
92 gr: 2298 (no compression)

IMR 4064:

68 gr: 2024
70 gr: 2114
72 gr: 2217
75 gr: 2337
77 gr: 2359 (no compression)

Observations:

We noticed most all of the lighter loads showing slight primer �back out� which we assume is from incomplete case expansion upon firing thus allowing the primer to back out a bit. This disappeared in all three powder types once we exceeded 2200 fps as evidenced by a slightly flattened primer. To answer a few questions in advance, the primer appearance was identical to the naked eye between the 2200 fps loads and those at higher velocities. From a headspace perspective I�m much more comfortable with the higher velocity.

Extraction was flawless over all loads.

Anyway, that�s my data and I thought it might be of interest.

Reed

Reed, thanks for posting your loads. Just for curiosity's sake I ran several through QuickLoad to get it's estimate of vel and pressure. Here's what it said:

81 IMR 4831 - 2120 34399psi
90 IMR 4831 - 2367 48056psi

83 H4831 SC - 2038 32634psi
92 H4831 SC - 2293 45269psi

68 IMR 4064 - 2119 38842psi
77 IMR 4064 - 2358 54022psi

And for grins, H4350 (not SC):

80 H4350 - 2175 35829psi
88 H4350 - 2405 48334psi

Damn, pretty close correlation between your predicted data and what we saw yesterday. Thankyou very much for taking the time to punch that data into the computer.

My buddy Jordan, aka the load meister, and I are already talking about doing another test load session and we're certainly open for powder variables. Right now we're thinking of R-15 and the other A Square recommended powders. If memory serves they recommend H4350, R-15, and one other (either 4198 or 4895). I don't have that book nor a burn rate chart in front of me to know if either of those, 4198 or 4895, is appropriate. Rest assured, we'll have our ducks in a row before starting.

Thanks again for the Quickload data.

Reed

Hey, a boy and his calculator...

70 Re15 - 2209 39028psi
77 Re15 - 2398 50352psi

66 H4895 - 2120 39001psi
74 H4895 - 2323 51844psi

69 IMR 4895 - 2235 39603psi
76 IMR 4895 - 2418 51290psi

All from QuickLoad, no actual experience here! My preference, for case filling, velocity and pressure, would be the H4350 loads if the accuracy is there. Nice cartridge, the .404, wish my recoil tolerance didn't putter out at .375 H&H.

Thanks again.

I bought this rifle about one month ago and was unable to shoot it, for a variety of reasons, until yesterday. Prior to that my "upper limit" was defined by a 338/416 Rigby Improved that really packs a wallup...who knows about actual numbers compared to this caliber, as well as a 10 gauge shotgun for turkey and geese.

I haven't been able to weigh this rifle yet but it doesn't strike me as particularly heavy. Having said that, the recoil was not too bad. I think the stock is pretty well designed relative to some other styles which in turn helps. I found that I did not like a SOLID cheek weld as it seemed to cause pain on that one shot. Backing off a bit made every other shot much more comfortable. It also pays to hold on tightly with the trigger hand (right hand in my case) to reduce the amount of pain on the middle finger as the trigger guard contacts it under recoil. I would highly recommend a glove during test shooting such as this. I'm like everybody else in that I never feel any of this sort of thing in a hunting situation.

Actually, I take that last statement back a bit as I was once hunting snow geese with that 10 ga. We had a bird come in kind of "funny" and I had to roll back onto my back and lean over to the side thus moving the stock to where it contacted the middle my (small) bicep instead of my shoulder...PAIN!! And it was felt right soon!!

We can call that last part a big bore virgin's thoughts on firing a 404 Jeffery for the first time...just like other things, I'm coming back for more.

Reed

Reed,
I find it strange that you had compression with 90 gr. of IMR4831 and none with 92 grs. of H4831...perhaps you have that backwards.

I shoot 95 grs. of IMR-4831 in my two 404's, a load I got from an article in some gun rag by Holt Boddinton?. It drew a lot of heat from some, here while back, but it is accurate and my brass lasts about 6 to 8 loadings so its OK in MY Mausers, and I have been shooting it for years. I get a good deal more velocity (about 100 FPS or so) than the above quotes with the same loads, but I also have a 27" and a 26" barrels.

My standard using load for Africa is 93 grs for a bit over 2400...

------------------
Ray Atkinson

ray@atkinsonhunting.com
atkinsonhunting.com

Hi Ray,

In answer to your question, no, we did not have that backwards. We had three different people in the room during our reloading triple checking all steps. I have about 7 years of reloading experience while the other two have decades of experience. We were keeping a close eye on powder level in the shoulder/neck areas.

Believe me, I had your numbers in my head as we were constructing those loads. Also, just for the record, I believe what you're saying so I'm not trying to give you heat.

I'm not so concerned about the velocity because you definitely have a longer barrel in this case and I personally believe that you may just have a special barrel with that 27" example. Chrono's don't typically lie.

I'm more interested in case capacity as we were using brand new Norma cases with brand new IMR 4831 and H4831SC purchased 2 years ago. We used a Redding scale that was about 5/100 of a grain high on a weight that was verified by an analytical scale that is accurate to +/- 1mg. My reloading buddy and I are both analytical chemists and have access to highly accurate scales at work. If we hadn't of been in a bit of a hurry to hit the road to return home (~3 hour drive) we would have come up with some quantifiable data on where the top of the powder column was in relation to the case mouth.

Figuring out if there is some sort of equipment difference contributing to the differences may solve some of this mystery. For example, are you using a technique to introduce the powder to the case that contributes to a given weight taking less volume, such as a long drop tube or a very slow introduction of powder to case? Do you typically use fire-formed cases? This may drive capacity up a bit depending on the sizing method you employ. Are you simply more comfortable than others in seating a bullet over a powder charge that is creaping up the neck? Is there a significant difference in density between H4831 and H4831SC?

My apologies if this seems to be belabored. With the relative lack of loading data for this caliber I find this forum to be very educational in terms of reloading options.

Thanks to all for both past and current information.

Reed

Ray,
He was using H4831SC instead of H4831. The SC, "short cut," has the grains cut shorter for easier metering, and slightly less volume by weight, than the older H4831 or IMR-4831.

------------------
RAB

BTW, the H4831SC has a different coating on each granule than the H4831. This deterrent coating slows the burn rate so that the shorter grained H4831SC does not burn faster than the longer grained H4831.

I believe Graeme Wright might even have suggested that H4831SC is 2% slower than H4831. This would be due to the different deterrent coatings, despite the shorter grains of H4831SC.

------------------
RAB

[This message has been edited by DaggaRon (edited 05-07-2002).]

That makes sense. I've always been a bit skeptical of the notion that H4831 and H4831SC have the same burn rates.

Reed

P.S. One last thing about all of those loads. At 25 yards with the open sights they all fell within about a 2 inch circle that was slightly high and left of center (about 2 inches from center at 10 to 11 o'clock). I was very pleased. Admittedly, 25 yards is so close we may not be giving enough distance to see any differences in loading. Use of a scope at a greater distance might show more variation.

You are both correct as I did not notice the SC until sometime after the post and that was my fault, just thought I'd let it fly unnoticed, should a known better n that.

Actually I have not had a problem of space in my 404 cases, mostly RWS and some bell and Norma. Compression is light and does exist..I don't have a problem with light compression and in fact I prefer it for accuracy and safty in slow burning powders. compaction is a whole nuther ballgame and they do not mean the samething...Compaction that caused misfires has in my experience been with ball powders and others handloads. I have not had to deal with this problem for unknown reasons.

I will allow the powder to come half way up the neck or near the top on most rounds and compressed loads has never caused me a problem.

In most cases truely compacted powder will push a bullet forward unless you have a crimp and this causes misfires in high temp countries or it gets blamed for misfires due to sloppy reloading practices in many cases, but I assume it can happen.

Keep in mind that 4831 ignites rather well, regardless of what one reads and I have never even had a misfire with that powder with standard primers..In fact I have never had a misfire in a rifle caliber in my life and that's a pretty good record. I have with pistols on more than several ocassions.

The 404 is a big case and will hold a world of powder, but the bottom line is that it made its name at 2125 FPS...I drive mine at 2300 to 2400 to preserve the bullets integrity and improve penitration...I have a Woodleigh bullet out of a 404 from a Buffalo at 2662 FPS and it is the size of a golf ball and perfect expansion but little stem is left, but that does speak well for the Woodleigh, it should have come apart. The newer Woodleighs for the 404 are toughened up as of this year..

------------------
Ray Atkinson

ray@atkinsonhunting.com
atkinsonhunting.com