This is not an invite for personal attack, just sharing info. If you don't like it, pass it by.

A friend on a budget wants to hunt this season, and only had the money for a used 30/30. He did want to have some ammo loaded up to use it on Elk but wanted to see what the maximum punch for his rifle.

Since I experiment a lot with the 30/30 as I like loading the round, I dug out an old load I worked up a while ago, and re-tryed it. I come across it trying to find something that shot well in a 1966 vintage Model 94 that has been inaccurate from the day it left the factory.

This proved to be the most accurate bullet out of that rifle, and needed the full velocity to be accurate.
The cases have been loaded over 5 times in experimenting and the primer went it just as tight as a new case. The bullet was seated to the length of a factory 150gr load, and was crimped, even tho the cannelure is below the case mouth.

Anyway, 35 grains of W 748, and a 220 Grain Sierra Round Nose. Chronographed velocity is 2100 fps from a 20 inch barrel. Recoil is noticable over a regular 30/30. Winchester and Remington cases used. Seat the bullet down until it compacts the 35 grains of powder, 35.5 grains is too much.

I do load this in the 30/30 with one in the barrel and one in the magazine, based on the crimp not being on the cannelure. However the bullet can only back out of the case, not fall into it. The case is full, believe me.

Work up if you try it. In a Single shot, there should be no problem. In fact if I get a single shot, I will try it with the 220 seated only to the cannelure and crimped. If anyone tries that I would like to hear the results on that.

Good luck!!

Seafire, I find this very interesting, indeed. I have done some loading with 220 grain bullets in both the .308 Winchester and the .303 British, and your load for the .30/30 comes close to the .308 (48 grains of N205/MRP), and equals what I was able to get from a .303 Jungle Carbine! I must record your load, and try it if I get a chance to test a .30/30! Thanks!

308-class performance seems very hot for a 30/30 lever gun. Wear your safety gear and work up carefully. FWIW, Sierra says 2100fps is about max for the 170 grain projectiles. Have you called Sierra or Win-Olin? Best-o-Luck All

Thats not quite 308 class, but it is easily pushing the enveolpe of a Mod 94. Interesting load indeed, it places the 30-30 in about the same class as a 35 Remington with buffalo bores souped up ammo which they do not reccomend for lever guns. FWIW.

Eldeguello:

do work that load up to the 35 grains of W 748.

As far as the only way to check pressure on this, for me is to try reloading the same cases and checking how stiff the primer goes back in after each firing.

to test this is usually will take 5 pieces of brass and then load them 5 times and check the primer for how snug it goes in. If it starts getting loose, I scrap the load.

This essentially duplicates the old 30/40 Krag load with a 220 grain RN.

As a gunsmith friend pointed out on this load, the case for the 30/30 is weak enough is that it would give way before the action would, even if the action was older.

I have also worked with W 748 enough to make the observation ( of which I can't explain why) but is does not seem to follow the pressure rules of a lot of other powders. In working up loads, one can get to a certain point and start to notice primer flatening. Then still go a grain or two higher, and the problem goes away and the velocity on the chrony starts to go down again.

Maybe a chemist can explain that if we have one on here, as I think it is probably programmed into the chemical formula.

Use a little common sense in working this up if one tries it is all.

Hi
Why don't you use somewhat slower burning powder like 4350 or 4381? it would give much less pressure! and maybe less speed, but who cares about speed if the range is short.
regards
Danny

The heaviest book load I've found with W-748 is 36.5 gr. with a 170-gr. bullet. In my new Win. 94, that seemed to be pushing it. I use 35.0 gr. which gets me a bit over 2100 fps in a 20" barrel.

The same charge with a bullet 29% heavier, seems a bit extreme, and I don't see how it could possibly get the same velocity. Would be interesting if someone could run Quickload on that.

If I were to hunt elk with my .30-30 I would use a 170-gr. Partition or a 150-gr. Barnes X. Brian Pearce had some penetration tests in Handloader that showed the X out-penetrating other brands.

John

seafire, I don't presently have access to any .30/30's, so it may be a while before I can check out your performance levels! (Seems to me that the standard 1/12 twist might be a bit slow in .30/30 for a 220 grain bullet, but it worked OK in a 1/12 .308 M70 FW....)

John: Please see below:

[ 08-07-2003, 17:45: Message edited by: eldeguello ]

I find that ~65kpsi makes the primer pocket loosen in rimless cases, and ~85kpsi in rimmed cases.

If the '94 is good for 85kspi, I think the above load is reasonable.

Quickload thinks that 220 gr friction proofed and 35 gr 748 in a 30/30, 2.55" OAL, is 102 kpsi and 2365 fps in a 20" barrel

But if I try an OAL of 2.76" and a bullet length of 1", then the pressure is 54 kpsi and the velocity 2130 fps.

The following passage from Ackley makes me think the '94 is up to it with an unlubricated chamber:

"Handbook for Shooters and Reloaders" Vol. 1 1962 P.O.Ackley
Chapter 7 "Pressure" page 140
"To further illustrate this principal, and old, discarded, beat up Winchester Model 94 rifle was resurrected from the junk pile. The barrel was rechambered for the "improved" 30-30 with a 40 [degrees] shoulder and minimum body taper... [Ackley went on to get case separation with factory 30-30 ammo in a an oiled improved chamber with the barrel unscrewed 2 turns, but with a dry chamber the case formed but did not separate]"
Chapter 7 "Pressure" page 147
"To further prove the point, the locking lug was removed from the action entirely leaving the breech block or bolt with no means of support other than the finger lever. See illustrations. The rifle was fired several times with the barrel tight. All cases appeared to be normal except for excessive primer protrusion. Now to state that this action will handle only certain pressers, or that the brass case will not support any amount of pressure seems to be out of order. There is plenty of room for further testing along these lines but the tests described seem to indicate that a very small percentage of the CHAMBER pressure was transferred to the breech bolt in the form of thrust. In this test the barrel absorbed the pressure while the action merely furnish the means for detonating the cartridge except when the chamber was oily.

The other illustration shows a Model 94 which was accidentally blown up. The load was supposedly 16 grains of Unique behind a 150 grain case bullet. A double charge was inadvertently thrown with the results shown. The action was not damaged except for threads being expanded when the chamber section of the barrel split. The barrel separated completely just forward of the chamber, the bullet passing downward severing the magazine tube and blowing the forearm to pieces. The shooter was not injured. This shows the high pressure could not be contained by the barrel but hat relatively straight standard .30/30 case did not back up against the breech bolt enough to harm ay of the action parts. The receiver has since been replaced and rifle works perfectly"

Well, lets see, responses to some of the following posts from my last one.

Once again, this is just a courtesy and not any intent of engaging in any arguments with anyone. I am on here to share info.

First, Danny P, makes a good point on some of the other powders like 4831 or 4350. However the W 748 load worked so well, I stopped there. However I would do it as a comparison for fun, and will post the results when I do.

Second: The One is 12 twist seems to stabilize the old round nose just fine. Round noses are easier to stabilize that spitzers any way. I was just looking for any load to shoot in this rifle since it sucked with about anything down the barrel.

Third: On some of this ballistic software, I can't respond since I don't have any and really don't have a use for it ( just personal preference). I get all my info from working it up in my own rifles, to fit THAT rifle.

However I have heard and seen written ( such as in the newer Speer manual) that some 30/30s are being made with tighter chambers. That might explain why the one gentleman had pressure problems with factory loads.

What I can say is that I also have a Marlin 30/30 in the Stainless Steel, and a 24 inch Model 94 Legacy Winchester. I have shot both loads in those two rifles with the same results.

They have also been shot in a new Model 94 from Walmart ( whatever model they sell) and a 1935 and 1950 production Model 94. While these rifles were not mine, but other people I know who wanted to try the load out, after seeing me use it and asked about it. The accuracy results were the same. Since it was my brass, I reloaded the brass again afterwards and the primers went again a stiff as new.

Frequently most of my 30/30 brass I get from a local gun shop as range brass. He charges me $5.00 a hundred for it, so I can get a lot for not much money. I have few cases that are ever bad, the ones that are, had someone step on them and mess up the neck, since the brass in so thin on a 30/30.

As to all, work it up slowly and set the bullet down to the Cartridge overall length of a 150 grain RN for it to function in the action.

I did load up a dummy round seated only to the cannelure. It will not function in a lever action, but it sure looked cool. It would be a great one to shoot in a single shot. If I ever find a Ruger Number One in 30/30, I will pick it up. Personally I like the little 30/30 case. It is easy to reload, does a good job and is like the Little Engine Who Could. It just doesn't have all the glamour of newer cartridges and older cartridges are just not politically correct.

Doesn't mean the litte guy is still not capable at all.

Seafire, while, I, like you, believe in doing things as safely as possible, the kind of experiment you have described here is the only way we ever learn anything new!! I for one appreciate your having told us about this load! (Who would have suspected the .30/30 was capable of such a performance?)

As a matter of interest, I have found that the 7.62X39mm will fire a Speer 180-grain .311 round-nose from an SKS at 2000 FPS using 28 grains of H335. This is a little better than the original 1895 .30/30 Winchester load upon which the reputation of the .30/30 was built (165 gr flatnose @ 1950 FPS.)

Shooting a 30-30 with a 200 grain bullet sounds rediculas. At 1800 to 2000 feet per second I doubt that weight would expand.

Paul B;

thanks for the explanation sir! Eldeguello, appreciate your response also.

As far as a 200 grain bullet expanding, I am speaking of a Jacketed bullet, Not a cast bullet.
Case bullets present no problems.

For the few of us that still use Round Nose bullets and have experience with them know that they will open very reliably at high or low velocity.

For the 220 grain Round Nose, remember this bullet has been around a lot longer than the old 180 boattail et al. It was used in the 30/40 Krag with a velocity of 2200 fps at the muzzle. It was the original bullet in both the 1903 Springfield ( 30/03) and then the original bullet in the 30/06. It was what was in the muzzles of '06s in World War I. (Correct me anyone if I am wrong.

These are rifles that developed 1800 to 2200 fps with Smokeless Powders and then if they reloaded with Black Powder the velocity was a lot less.

A 220 grain Round Nose will work just fine in this application and due to its bullet weight and sectional density, it will frequently out penetrate a lot of spendy premium bullets.

The load I mentioned above, chronographed at 2100 in several 20 inch barrels Model 94s and 336 Marlins. It gave 2150 in a 24 inch Barrel Model 94 Legacy.

Since the bullet is seated below the cannelure, although I crimp the case with a Lee Neck Crimp, I still only load two cases in the rifle, One in the magazine and one in the barrel. Just being safe as the recoil is noticable over a standard 170 grain load.

Funny how people shooting single shots would not question this load, but guys in lever actions do. Mainly because it is not published in a book. It is a 150 yd load, maybe 200 if the target is as large as an elk or moose.

A recoil pad might be a good idea tho, LOL!!

[ 08-09-2003, 09:38: Message edited by: seafire ]

Very good reading although I don't even have a 30/30 any more but many years ago i put a lot of deer meat on the table with one.Had a 32 special also really liked it too back then.
Question is since you are talking 30'30 didn't years ago have an offering factory load with a 180 gr bullet? I am thinking that was what I shot but really cannot remember.

Also, the government never loaded 220-grain bullets in military .30/'06 ammunition. The reason the .30/'03 was dropped in 1906 was because the U.S. decided to load the 150-grain spitzer in government ammo instead of 220 graiin bullets, and they shortened the neck of the '03 round at the same time they adopted the 150-grain slug (thus emulating the Germans, who went to the 150-grain bullet in the 8mm Mauser round in 1905). The MV of the German S-bore, 150-grain ammo was 2880 FPS; the 1906 U.S. 150-grain MV was 2700. The Germans later adopted a heavy S-bore spitzer boattail bullet of 198 grains because they needed a better long-range machinegun round than they had in the 150-grain load. The U.S. eventually followed suit again by adopting the M1 spitzer-boattail of 172 grains, which was designed and adopted in the 1920's, when Col. T. Whelen commanded Frankford Arsenal. The Germans continued to use the "heavy pointed bullet" (Schweres Spitzegeschoss) of 198 grains throughout WWII, but we went back to the 150-grain (cal. .30 M2 Ball) when the M1 Garand rifle was adopted, around 1936. The reasons we went back to the ligher bullet were never very clear. Some allege it was because the M1 couldn't handle the heavier bullet well (NOT TRUE!!); others say it was because a lot of the National Guard ranges across the country didn't have sufficient danger space downrange for safety with the longer range ammo (5000 yards vs 3500 yards-I suspect this was the real reason for going back to 150-grain bullet). However, the M1-type 172-grain bullet was retained for loading government National Match ammo.

quote:

---

Shooting a 30-30 with a 200 grain bullet sounds rediculas. At 1800 to 2000 feet per second I doubt that weight would expand.

---

This is dependent upon bullet construction! The original .30/30 load fired a 165-grain bullet at 1950 FPS, and the boys said this "newfangled high-velocity" load killed like lightning. Of course, the bullets used in those days had a lot of lead exposed up front, and when these bullets began to be driven at velocities possible in rounds like the .30/'06, they were too soft, and blew up! The spectacular failures of such bullets at '06 velocities are what made people like Elmer Keith conclude that the '06 wasn't much good for anything bigger than a jackrabbit! As much as I respect ol' Elmer, what he was seeing was bullet failure, not cartridge failure! If the old '06 had been loaded with Nosler Partition bullets way back then, he would have had a much different experience with it!!

[ 08-10-2003, 18:02: Message edited by: eldeguello ]

Eldeguello. I have both of Elmer's books, BIG GAME RIFLES, (1936) and KEITH'S RIFLES FOR LARGE GAME (1946). In the 1936 book, Elmer considers the 30-06 a reasonably decent rifle for big game. In the 1946 book, however, the amount of hatred he bears the 30-06 is such that you'd think the cartridge had molested his wife and children. Of course, I agree with you that the quality of bullets back then were not as they are now, but look at some of the slugs he used. The 174 gr. 9 degree boatail bullets with the noses filed off to make soft nosed bullets? No wonder he had failures. But then again, he also had failures with 275 gr. bullets on black bear from a .35 Whelen. Seems like they were punching on through and the bears were running off. Bullets were too tough and not opening up.
Then too, we have to consider the terrain he mostly hunted on. Thick black timber with most shots at animals running away. No wonder he made so much comment about "raking" shots.
I don't agree with everything Elmer said, but neither do I agree with everything Jack O'Connor said.
Paul B.
Paul B.

PaulB., I certainly agree with what YOU said, though. I only have the 1946 book, so was unaware of Elmer's change in point of view RE: the .30/'06!

[ 08-11-2003, 18:14: Message edited by: eldeguello ]

I thought that 220 gr was too long for a '94 to stabilize. Isn't a '94 a 1 in 12" twist?

Clark,

the old Round noses seem to stabilize better than a spitzer. IN my 30/30s it seems to give the most accuracy of any bullet down the barrel in all three of mine. In fact, in the 1966 Model 94, it is the only 308 caliber bullet that seems to give decent accuracy enought to hunt with. Second is the 180 grain round nose, tied with the Hornady, 174 grain 311 bore Round nose.

Searching for something it would shoot is what made me stumble onto the this load and worked it up.

I am drawn to this thread like a moth to a light bulb, as I have a 1971 '94 that I got to just see what it can do with some overloading.

I can't get to the range until the fall, so I just keep checking this thread

Seafire et al:
I tried to stay away..really I did but when people seem eager to experiment with gross overloads I have to say..hey go easy and put your brain in gear. 35 grains of 748 is listed by Hodgdon #26 as maximum for 150 grain bullets ! 33 grains is listed as maximum with 170 grainers. 35 grains would be a good load for 220 grain bullets in a 307 Win at 50000psi. I would never..ever use this load with 220 grain bullets in a 30-30, especially with a plane jane Winchester lever gun. You will never see a reputable source quote a load like this not because they are sissies but because they have access to pressure equipment and have to be responsible. Unlike some anonymous poster on the internet who enjoys playing with his own and others safety by ignoring common sense and any knowledge of interior ballistics. In a 20" barrell in a 30-30 you get 303 British ballistics only by grossly exceeding the pressure constraints of the little case and rifle. I pay attention to pressure signs and I find getting a 30-30 to 2100 with 170 grain bullets at factory pressure levels enough of a challenge. Getting 50 grains more to the same speed is foolish. I know that you asked not to invite an attack and I am trying to pull my punches a bit but this kind of thing is irresponsible to print! Get a 170 Nosler Partition to 2200 tops and call it a day please. +P might be ok but +++P in an ancient action design might not bode well for a long and healthy life. If you want 2100 out of a 20" barrel please buy a .308. If you want to remove any and all safety margin from the past-time of reloading please do so privately.

North of 60: damn well said......

Not with the intention of starting an argument with anyone on here:

However the last two posts above: From what I read, what you two gentlemen are putting forth is mass amounts of statistics from a variety of sources.

However I can assume that those statements are made without ever working up a load to that point personally. As we all should no how to work up a load and look for the many signs of pressure, if we don't see it personally, should we pay more attention to someone who has not any hands on experience on the subject, than what we have experienced ourselves?

I assume people on here have common sense.

I also have seen that until recently max loads with a 55 or 60 grain bullet in a 243 was 45 grains of H 380. However I worked up a load testing for accuracy in a Remington and found it has poor accuracy until I hit 50 grains. I had no pressure signs, but I had all sorts of people give me the same self righteous speeches " In the reload manuals, it states max pressure is obtained at 45 grains.!"

Well Nosler comes out with their manual for the 55 grain Ballistic Tip in a 243 and their max load for H 380 in a 243 was 53 grains! 3 more than I was using, and 8 more than in previous manuals.

For a 200 grain bullet in a 30/06, I was using a load with H 4831SC at 60 grains. A bunch of critics told me that was 'overloaded' according to a bunch of their load manuals. However me seeing no pressure signs was irrelevant, and I was an idiot. Well when I found that 60 grains of that powder was listed in a Lyman Manual, # 47 with a 200 grain bullet and showed them, their response was it was a misprint or Lyman does not know what they are talking about.

I have heard the explanation for that from other critics, Your perspective would also be interesting reading.

If you have hands on experience of a load you worked up and had pressure signs with before that amount of powder, I am sure most of us would take that imformation with a lot more credence.

[ 08-14-2003, 07:46: Message edited by: seafire ]

SEAFIRE:

Fair enough. You say you looked for pressure signs....if your chronograph says 2100 ft/sec with a 220 grain bullet in a Win 94 30-30 it seems to me you are ignoring a SHOUTED sign from the gods that you have gone too far.
There is no magic in interior ballistics and to get thet kind of speed from a 44.5 grain capacity case means PRESSURE is high. Very high.
I once "worked" up a load with 225 grain Hawk bullets in my 350 Rem Mag. I used a load that was safe with Nosler partitions and normally a shorter flat point will give less pressure than a long spitzer. The case & primer looked fine. The first negative clue was on wet paper testing... as phone books were blown nearly in two as if I had a sudden power surge to 358 Norma levels. When I chronographed the load it was over 2900ft/sec. I chronographed another one thinking there must be an error and hit over 2950. Thought my chronograph was busted until I tried to open the bolt and couldn't. Using a brass rod down the barrel and a mallet I opened the rifle up at home and the brass was nearly welded to the bolt and swollen. When knocked out of the bolt the primer fell out of the case. This was close to rampaging gas escaping the case and wrecking the Rem 660 and maybe my face. the point is you don't get speeds out of the normal range without pressure being out of the normal range too.
I too have found in some rifles I can move up the powder charge from listed loads. My two 6.5 Rem Mag can digest a fair bit more H4831 than Hornady suggests is safe but my top velocities are in line or nearly in line with theirs.
My Powley computer suggests that 1850 with a 220 grain 30 caliber bullet in a 44.5 grain case and 20" barrel would be a good target to strive for. Even this might be a tad high as the computer is designed for bolt gun pressure levels.
250 feet/sec over this is a sign of excessive and perhaps dangerous pressure. Good luck, maybe I am wrong but I personally wouldn't use your load.

One more example.... The 375 Win a case with slightly more capacity and designed for 50,000psi with a much bigger expansion chamber is rated at 21-2200 ft/sec with a 220 grain bullet. I'd say you have to be significantly over 50000psi to reach these speeds in a 30-30.

One more thing before I go to bed. Personal experience is fine and dandy but we had a lad from Idaho come up here last week and go over our 114 foot water fall in a kayak. He survived (barely) and even videotaped the stunt for sale. However, I don't think this was safe! And you won't find me replicating it to prove my position.

You guys from the North West States must be a different breed. Cheers.

I have overloaded to see what happens: .223, .243, 25acp, 257 Roberts AI, 32acp, 32sw, 32S&WLong, 32-20, 7.62x25mm, 7.62x54R, 8x57mm, 9x19mm, 9x23mm, 357 Sig, 38 sp, 357 mag, 38sw, 40sw, 10mm, 10.4mm, 45acp, 45Colt, 452/70, .410, and 45/70.

I have described the results on the internet over the passed few years. Here I am describing a 23% overload in a 223 here on the accurate reloading forums:

I keep a file of negative reactions. You would think I was grave robbing, cloning people with three heads and human sacrifice. There is no discussing overloads in a public forum without getting such reactions. I think I could have saved years of effort if I could have had access to what has been done before but is censored by fear of the negative reactions.

The way I maintain my moral compass is to remind myself that I climbed Mt Daniel and I can describe that on line. If most people attempted it, they might die. I can still describe my findings. [img] http://www.nookhill.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=6;t=008843#000002]http://www.nookhill.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=6;t=008843#000002 [/img]

[ 08-19-2003, 18:41: Message edited by: Clark ]

I have no problem with overloading cartridges. I've done it before, and it is still interesting to read about. However, I don't do it today -- I get a bigger cartridge instead!

I would let any spectators at the range know what I was doing so they could make their own decisions (and I made sure that I left none of these "blue pills" where anybody could get them.

Keep the interesting posts coming (but do post appropriate cautions for the newbies!).

jpb

quote:

---

Originally posted by Clark:
<snip>I keep a file of negative reactions. You would think I was grave robbing, cloning people with three heads and human sacrifice. There is no discussing overloads in a public forum without getting such reactions. <snip>

---

Clark:
The difference in your moral stance is this: the success of climbing a mountain or kayaking over the waterfall is due to personal skill and training and judgement and some fate. There is a large element of personal factors that the participant can control to some extent.

Surviving working in the red-line in handloading ( a 23% overload qualifies) is due almost entirely to chance. You remove the safety factor so that the peice of brass that is a bit softer or has some internal flaw now lets go and rampaging gas hits you in the face.

Look I have no problem with what any one does for kicks. There is nothing new about over-loads. Wild catters for years have been doing it. Every guy who put a different shoulder angle on a 30-06 case and then mysteriously got 300 magnum velocities was over-loading. Most of the time you get away with it. Sometimes you don't... and like any game of russian roulette you just never now which pull of the trigger might change your life.

If you pay your own medical insurance by all means proceed... but for the good of all please post an appropriate warning may I suggest the following standard warning:

The following load may kill or maim you or any-one firing it. No source with pressure testing equipment or the need to consider public safety would ever sanction this load. It creates velocities and pressures which will shorten the life of the brass and firearm and could be easily reproduced safely by going to a larger capacity case. For Dumb-asses who know better than every authority only.

Warning to newbies:
The above post by eldeguello may contain facetious material [ tongue in cheek, humor, he is not serious]

As a conscientious handloader, I am always concerned about readers that are dumber than myself.
There ARE newbies who are dumber that me!
There must be.
I am very concerned.

The first Line of this post " This is not an invite for personal attack, just sharing info. IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT, PASS IT BY":

I compliment those that have made comment that this thread has not produced personal slander in any way. Each response has been professional and courtious in my opinion.

I can appreciate those that do want to follow all the information in load manuals. I highly recommend that for new people, and do not knock anyone that uses it as a bible. I use load manuals as a point of reference. I do not consider the load shared with others as overload in my opinion. However I do recommend trying to work up to that point if the end results that I got were desirable. ( I do also support the gentleman who said if you need a bigger caliber, use one). This load was worked up to give an Elk load to an acquaintance, who could only afford a 30/30 but wanted a maximum punch for Elk hunting.

The results I found surprised me and I was impressed. Just for informational purposes, I have loaded several cases 20 times with still no pressure problems that I have observed, the primers still went in nice and tight, and their has been no extraction problems in my rifles or anyone else who has used this load.

Once again, this is info passed along, with no more intention that sharing my observations. Make use of it, if it fits your needs.

I do not really get into what I call overloading.
In handloading I do like to personally understand what my rifles have the capability of, on both ends of the spectrum. This morning I went out and was testing subsonic loads in a 30/06 with 110 grain round nose bullets comparing if there would be any accuracy with them that was useful. I actually think that this would be a good 100 yd load for the little blacktail deer around here. Recoil was non existance. My motivation on that was to have working knowledge of a load that a kid could use, when he is 12 and end up inheriting grandpas 30/06 and then his dad gets pissed off at the kid because the recoil of a 165 grain factory load is way too much for the 12 yr old to handle.

As far as pressures listed in a manual, I do agree with Eldeguello, it has not been tested a whole lot, because of what is perceived as the limitation of the desire for the loads by the public.

I will point out the old 303 Savage came factory loaded with 190 grain bullets. A few old timers have also told me that they use to load 200 and 210 grain cast bullets in 30/30 and 303 Savages. I have seen the 220 grain bullet in something that had Parker Ackley's name on it, but looking for it I did not find it.

In closing, I did use W 748 for a reason, or the reference manual crowd as the number of us who reload a 30/30 are a small community.

Using the 47th and 48th Edition Lyman manuals as reference. With a 150 grain bullet and 36.5 grains of W 748, pressure was listed at 36,400. With a 170 grain bullet and 35.6 grains of 748, pressure is lower at 35,300. ( Both are CUP pressures). With a 170 grain cast bullet, 37.3 grains of 748 is listed as 35,100 CUPs. With 35 grains in a 173 grain bullet it is listed as 32,900 CUPs. So an increase in bullet weight did not correlate to an automatic increase in pressure, but actually a decline in some instances. This as a point of reference, I worked up the 220 grain load to that point. For point of reference, the 180 grain round noses with the same load ( 35grains of W 748) also gave me the same velocity as the 220 grain bullet.
In theory this made no sense, but I have learned in reloading their are patterns, but no absolutes.

Just passing on the facts I have observed, no more no less.

Seafire, once again, thanks for a lot of interesting information, and for stimulating some thought!

Warning to newbies:
My previous post may contain facetious material [ tongue in cheek, humor, not serious]

As a conscientious handloader, I am always concerned about readers that are dumber than myself.
There ARE newbies who are dumber that me!
There must be.
I am very concerned.

Warning to newbies:
My previous post may contain facetious material [ tongue in cheek, humor, not serious]

As a conscientious handloader, I am always concerned about readers that are dumber than myself.
There ARE newbies who are dumber that me!
There must be.
I am very concerned.