Went back out this morning and fireformed 21 cases. I used 7 gr of Bullseye and filled with COW. I did 3 with 10 gr as a comparison, and saw no difference, but they did give a more satisfying crack. I didn't anneal beforehand, and had three split necks. I annealed after the fact. I do it that way so I don't have to re-anneal. All the fireformed cases looked perfect, unlike the necked up cases. With the two loaded rounds I had, I now have a full box of 20 to play with. I fired the two good rounds I made by necking up. They were one each of the first and second charges. I will start with the second and work up. I am using 3031, which is probably close on burning rate. I suspect from the charge I used and the look of the cases and primers, I may be able to completely fill the case. I measured the case volume of the 284 vs the 06, and it is about 1.5 gr less to the base of the neck. On the necked up cases, the 284 is about equal, due to shoulder angle and placement. The 06 case will suffer in 411 or 416, since the 284 can be seated to the base of the neck and still be less than 3.25"OAL. The 06 is up against bullet length, so I think they will be equal if using a Mauser action.

The two loaded rounds were actually pretty mild to shoot. I suspect they were around 1900 and 1975 with 350 grain bullets, and I hand held the rifle with one hand down the shooting tube while standing to the side for safety, as this was the first firing. The rifle, currently without scope or sights, weighs 7.5 pounds by my digital scale.

After I load a few rounds, I will try to chrono some loads to see how they compare to the ballistic software. One thing the software predicts is a big improvement for seating out, since this is nearly a straight sided case.

I have had and still own several .416's, Ruger, Rigby, Rem., Taylor and WSM. I actuall built the WSM for a friend. I like my Taylor most of all. It's big enough for anything except Blue Whale and doesn't damage the operator. Cases and reloading are simple. I think it is the best of the .416's for hunting.......Tom

Thanks, Art - That's a very useful report and confirms how I think I will go with this barrel. That is, I think I'll just blatantly copy what you are doing.

As I said before, I can always rechamber to a larger case if for some reason I decide that's necessary (which is very doubtful).

At the distances I shoot most of my game that bullet will still be cruising along at 1600 fps or so when it contacts the animal. I can't think of anything in North America a .416" diameter bullet of 300-400 grains weight won't put a severe hurt on. If I need more, I'll call for air support and left "puff" take over.

As I am going to the gunsmith's this afternoon (like I do every Friday afternoon), think I'll just take along a vz-24 action and this barrel and get the ball thumping and bounding down the hill toward completion. Gawd I wish I had my lathe back....

Well, this took a lot longer to happen than I thought it would, due to other projects.

The action I am using for the test bed wasn't drilled and tapped, but it did have an older Wiliams reciever signt, so I dug out a front ramp and installed it so I wouldn't shoot the chrony.

Anyway, I took several rifles I am working on to the range this morning.

I had prepared three sets of loads. Most of the scant loading data I had found for the 400 Whelen used IMR 3031, and I have had good luck with it in straingt, or nearly so, cases. Most of the data I found showed either 60 or 61 grains as max with a 300 graing bullet, and around 57 with the 350. The first couple of test loads I fired the other day were with 46 grains, just to check the headspacing etc.

The necked up 284 case has maybe 1-2 grains less capacity to the mouth than the listed capacity of the 400, but should be about the same to the base of the neck, which is the important number. I prepared loads of 48.5 gr, 52.5 gr, and 55 grains. I used both 350 Speer magtips and the Barnes monometal 300. The Barnes bullet is actually longer and has more bearing surface than the SPeer, and is longer behind the cannelure, which encroaches on powder space. I loaded both bullets at each of these powder charges at two seating depths. I seated them at both the cannelure and with the base of the bullet even with the neck/shoulder junction. (The long throat should come in handy).

Basically, I got no real difference in performance between the two bullets at any given powder charge. Neither bullet weight or seating depth seemed to affect velocity. I would suspect pressure may be slightly lower at the longer OAL, and accuracy may be better.

Here are the results I recorded (at 15 ft from the muzzle):

48.5 gr 3031/300/short/1815 fps
48.5 gr 3031/350/short/1805 fps
48.5 gr 3031/300/long/1832 fps
48.5 gr 3031/350/long/1822 fps

52.5 gr 3031/300/short/1960 fps
52.5 gr 3031/350/short/1944 fps
52.5 gr 3031/300/long/1976 fps
52.5 gr 3031/350/long/1989 fps

55 gr 3031/300/long/2042 fps
55 gr 3031/350/long/2069 fps

These compare to 400 Whelen data published which shows a 300 with 60 gr @ 2265 fps and
a 350 with 57 gr at 2100 fps.

Given the data, it is obvious that the longer bearing surface of the monometal bullet offsets the lighter weight. This is the older style non-banded bullet which I had in stock. THe newer banded bullets are likely much better, but I don't believe they make a 300 any more.

It is also obvious that the cartridge is essentially the same as the 400 Whelen. Non of the loads I listed showed any signs of pressure. You could lift the bolt with one finger after firing all of them. Actually, it took more effort to chamber the new cartridges than to open after firing. I chambered it pretty tightly, and the final fireforming seems to settle everything in place. The firing pin of the Mauser is giving the primer a good lick, and all but the 55 gr loads exhibited primers that had been knocked slightly concave by the firing pin and not flattened back. The 55 gr loads looked like normal primers.

The loads were all compressed to some extent. The 55 grain loads had to be crimped to hold the bullet in place. I had annealed the case necks after firmforming, so the necks are still soft.

I am not ready yet to invest in a custom die, so I went to eBay and bought a set of Lee 416 Rem dies for $20 and a Lee factory crimp die in 416 Rem for $15. The crimp die is not hardened, so I simply turned the collet and body down on the lathe to match the lengtn of my case, and it makes great collet crimps. This works well, since a lot of 284 based wildcats I have worked with suffer a lot of shoulder bulges when using a normal crimp die.

The 2 die set I cut off with a grinder and use as a neck sizing and seating die. The shoulder diameter of the 416 Rem is only .012" less than the 284 Win case (.487 vs .475) so it guides the case in well.

All in all I am pleased so far. Next I hope to do some more load development. Based on the article I saw by Michael Petrov, I suspect that H-4895 may be a good powder to try. With a little more 3031, or a good load of H-4895, I would hope to get the 350 Speer to 2200. I am looking for a 300 gr conventional bullet, which I think could push 2350-2400 with the right load. Finally, I would like to find a solid in the 350-375 range. I suspect a 400 gr solid, seated out, could be driven at around 2000 fps, which would put it in the 450-400 class of performance. As it is, it looks to be a real buster for close range shooting of elk, moose, big bears and possibly big cats.

The nice thing to remember is that the rifle I am working with right now only weighs 7.7 pounds with iron sights, and the recoil is really pretty mild. With a compressible stock, a thick pad and only 55 gr of powder, it is really easy to shoot. Once I finish defining loads, I will drill and tap, put a scope on and look at relative accuracy. The barrel I am using only cost $46 bucks, and I don't know a lot about it. I have never seen a decent big bore barrel that wouldn't shoot well, so I don't want to waste a lot of up front time worrying about accuracy. I will save that until after the pformance is nailed down.

You guys that are talking about necking the WSSM case up to 416 really haven't done your research.

Why bother necking WSSM up to 416, when you can cut WSM off at the shoulder and neck down, its a hell of a lot easier in the bigger calibres, it will give the same end result and is technically the same brass,

It will hold slightly more powder than the 284 case as well.



Regards S & F

I'd go with a 416 B&M or the 416 WSM. I've got a B&M and love it. It out performs my 416 Rem mag with the same length barrel. 22 inch. You can always load down or shoot lighter bullets if you don't like the recoil.

Well, I have already done this, so it is a moot point. As I read Alberta's notes, he has already started too. The point of these types of wildcats is to make a mild round, not load reduced loads in a big case. I have several 416 caliber rifles I could (and have) loaded down, and I can tell you without doubt that it isn't the same thing. The rifle I am working on kicks, in a sub 8 pound rifle, much like a 30-06. No load in a much heavier Rigby I have ever shot feels that way. A reduced load in a Rigby feels more like a 338, and is much heavier to carry and hunt with. Not every gun has to maximize the bore potential. Sometimes it's fun to see how minimalist you can go.

quote:

Originally posted by Art S.:
Well, I have already done this, so it is a moot point. As I read Alberta's notes, he has already started too. The point of these types of wildcats is to make a mild round, not load reduced loads in a big case. I have several 416 caliber rifles I could (and have) loaded down, and I can tell you without doubt that it isn't the same thing. The rifle I am working on kicks, in a sub 8 pound rifle, much like a 30-06. No load in a much heavier Rigby I have ever shot feels that way. A reduced load in a Rigby feels more like a 338, and is much heavier to carry and hunt with. Not every gun has to maximize the bore potential. Sometimes it's fun to see how minimalist you can go.

Art if your refering to my comment, I didnt say anything about LOADING down a big case.

What I'm trying to say is

If you stand a WSSM case next to a WSM case it starts at the shoulder, so if you ever wanted to make a BIG calibre on the WSSM case size, your just plain mad trying to stretch 243 or 25 cal up to 416, just get the bigger WSM case "cut" it off at the shoulder and turn it into shorter BASIC and run it into the FL die to REDUCE it to 416, same shoulder and neck

For argument sake if they made 284 BASIC I bet you'd perfer to neck down not up, to make your little wildcat, I'm sure you'd agree its a lot easier to create doing it this way, no annealing or step expanders, you could probably go down to 375 like this, any smaller your better to neck up.

Similarly by cutting a WSM case off at the shoulder it will make WSSM BASIC,

Thats why I said anybody trying to neck up 25 WSSM to 416 really hasnt done any research because it's easier in that calibre to neck BASIC brass down.

Hopefully I've cleared things up

regards
S&F

That's true, and that very fact has been discussed at length several times in this thread. I in fact have supported this idea as to necking up vs down. However, after trying several methods I found that the easiest way was to simply fireform with Bullseye and cream of wheat, then anneal. It works perfectly and requires no hard forming operations. It also probably gives the most concentric cases.

There are actually cylindrical 284 cases available. However they are slightly longer than regularcases and must be cut down. The drawback of this or what you suggest is that it requires either a lot of case trimming or an expensive custom trim die. Ultimately, fireforming is the easy way.

I believe in the KISS principle. I would do a .416 Ruger and cut the barrel down to 20-22 inches.

quote:

Originally posted by Art S.:
Well, I have already done this, so it is a moot point. As I read Alberta's notes, he has already started too. The point of these types of wildcats is to make a mild round, not load reduced loads in a big case. I have several 416 caliber rifles I could (and have) loaded down, and I can tell you without doubt that it isn't the same thing. The rifle I am working on kicks, in a sub 8 pound rifle, much like a 30-06. No load in a much heavier Rigby I have ever shot feels that way. A reduced load in a Rigby feels more like a 338, and is much heavier to carry and hunt with. Not every gun has to maximize the bore potential. Sometimes it's fun to see how minimalist you can go.

Exactly. Besides. I already HAVE a good many larger cased similar cartridges in other rifles. I DON'T want more of them. I want a few quite mild ones to just take out and use with pleasure in the woods in bolt action rifles.

Right now for instance, amongst other "biggers" I have a rifle which is a .416 Remington Magnum in every way except it uses .411" diameter 400 grain bullets instead of .416" diameter 400 grain bullets. It even uses standard .416 Remington brass, neck-sized only, to .411". Why do that to a .416 Remington case? Well, how about because I got the rifle many years before the .416 Remington ever came into existance? All Remington basically did when they brought their version out was to take the .404 Barnes Supreme cartridge and neck it up .005". Anyway, I COULD download and use that rifle. but I don't. and what's worse, I almost never fire it for any reason. It just isn't light, handy, with pleasant recoil, as I want a woods rifle to be. It is basically a thumper for places like Africa...not one of my current priorities.


Let me just ask this to make the point...What exactly is the logic of building a rifle to take a larger case than one wants or needs? Why have the PITA of developing reduced loads, and then making sure they are kept separate from full ones...and believe me, with larger cases there WILL be some with full loads lying about. That's just human nature, and even my wife admits I border on being human some days.

As to making brass, in this instance it will be easiest to fire-form up, rather than to neck ANYTHING down. Why? Because as Art points out, trimming is not nearly the same PITA this way, and it really doesn't require a set of dies, or any substantial care/thought/effort to fireform...just shovel in powder, add bullet, pull trigger.

More important to me, I don't have to locate basic brass, or stock it IN ADDITION TO standard .284 brass. I have other rifles which use .284 brass (and a good supply of that brass), and this way one supply of brass works as a donor for multiple rifles without having to set up an inventory control system.

OK

1stly sorry for the thread hijack

2ndly we are talking about a 416 Barrel and calibre right

SO let me get this right

What your telling me is like this for example ...... it would be better to neck up and/or blow out 7mm Rem Mag Brass to make a 416 Taylor Brass, than to neck down 458 Win Mag or belted magnum brass.

Sorry guys I've tried it and no it's not easier to do that.

No doubt It's easy to neck up 7mm to 338 and you might even struggle and get it to .350 or 375 maybe even 416. But why bother, run basic or straight 458 Win mag into a 416 Taylor die and it's formed, done and dusted.

Sorry guys I cant understand the logic in trying to step a neck up from .284 to .416 - which is .132 thou and have to deal with possible neck splits, when you can neck down basic from .500 (inside of WSM brass) or even .458 to .416 - this is only .84 and 42 thou respectively with no old shoulder creases

Note this is only in reference to mentioned 416 calibre any smaller I would agree with you all about necking up, but NOT with 416

I've created a small 458 on the basic WSSM case here in Australia and all I do is put 300 WSM in a drill and hack saw blade the shoulder off, clean up the cut and form WSSM basic, run it into my custom FL die and it's done, If I was making a 416 on this platform I'd do the same.


300WSM to WSSM basic

I create this brass in about 45 seconds and another 15 seconds to run it into the FL die, there is no fireforming to do

Seriously look at the picture below, you think you could neck the 243WSSM up to this could you ???? as easy and without loss as I can, granted mine is 458 but 416 isnt that much smaller



I Couldnt begin to imagine how difficult it would be to step up from 243 - 25 WSSM brass to 270, then 308 then 338 then 375, then perhaps anneal, then try and blow it out to 416 or 458, I dont think the success rate would be very good, involves loading, powder, COW, primers and a fire


So I'll say it again if anybody thinks it's easier to neck up 243 or 25 cal WSSM brass to 416 calibre, then they havent done their homework, cause I can make 458 (only .42 thou more) and it's as easiy as pie and a lot less work.


regards S&F

I wasn't talking about a hard and fast rule, just this particular conversion. I think each case is unique. I too neck down 458 to Taylor. It is about like a neck sizing. I wouldn't fireform 7mm. However, I would fireform 7mm over cutting off, say 340 weatherby, trimming and sizing down. It's the trimming part that causes me grief with this plan. That is a much more time consuming process on a rough, chopped off case. Throwing in that step is the deal breaker for me, when you consider that the fireformed brass will likely be more concentric anyway.

Yeh that IS thread hijacking S&F.

And I, for one, was not talking about necking a .243 WSSM up to .416 anything. Just a simple blowing out of .284 Winchester brass to accept a .416 bullet. No length change, no special trim, no multiple anneals, nada...as in "nada damn thing" .

Unlike lots of folks I don't even bother to put bullets into brass I blow out to larger neck sizes, most of the time. I just work up a charge of Bullseye, Nike, or a similar speed powder until pressure with NO bullet is high enough to do the trick.

I write that charge in my loading notes, then the next time I need more brass, I take my Neal Jones powder measure to the range with me, dial in the correct charge, and start fireforming...prime case, dump powder in case, shoot. Repeat as many times as I need rounds of brass.

I know lots of folks view that with absolute horror, but it works well for me. They can do whatever they wish, I don't mind a bit.

Now, back to what to do with my .416 barrel...

Art has come up with the suggestion dearest to my heart so far. Anyone have any other ideas about a nice, useable in the woods NON-MAGNUM .416 chambering?

FWIW, I'd go with the 416 Ruger.

To me, the absolute best thing about the 416/284 is the cost for a tinkerer. I am in for $35 total. You can chamber with a 284 family reamer and a 416 N&T. I spent $35 for a set of 416 Remmy dies and collet crimp die, and converted them in 15 minutes to a perfectly good set of neck sizing dies. It doesn't get any cheaper than that for a wildcat.
Based on the numbers above, I feel sure that I can get 2350 with 300's and 2100 with 350's. I would like to experiment down the road with some 350 solids. (I may try lathe turning down some 400 monometals. The 370 North Forks may be interesting.

I would post some pictures, but right now, it is only a Model 1935 with the original trigger, a peep sight, a rough turned barrel and an old Bell and Carlson stock. I am going to swap the trigger and finish developing loads before I do anything cosmetic. The old barrel I bought may or may not shoot, but I have a Douglas #4 weight 416 Taylor I may set back and rechamber if I need to.