Results 1 to 9 of 9
  1. #1
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    19

    Times change----or do they?

    WARNING. Do not use the loading information I am going to give here, to load your ammunition. You load in strict accordance with your loading manual.

    Got a new 243, the bolt action new Marlin, 7XS, so to the reloading bench to load some ammo for it.
    In the 1964-65 Ellwood Epps catalogue is a loading chart by Hodgdons. I used this chart extensively for much of my earlier reloading, after I switched from Norma powder to American powder, and always found the Hodgdon chart safe and efficient, with various rifle calibres.
    This loading chart, like all the early charts, was very simple. It showed, for the designated cartridge to be loaded, the type of powder and the charge weight for a bullet of a given weight. Nothing else was given. At the top of the chart they cautioned that one should start a little lighter than the charge given, and work up to it.
    For my new Marlin I wanted to use 100 grain bullets and H4831 is a good powder for the 100 grain bullet in 243 Winchester. Thus, I go to my bible of reloading information, the 1964-65 Ellwood Epps catalogue and the Hodgdons loading chart. It shows a charge weight of 46 grains with the 100 grain bullet, for a velocity of 3009. I happen to have some original war surplus H4831, the identical powder the chart was predicated on and this is what I used for my loading for the new rifle.
    I next look up my own reloading records and see that I have loaded one 243 with the standard load given, 46 grains, while another 243 I had, a Ruger 77, I loaded with 47 grains of H4831, with a 100 grain bullet. The Oehler chronograph gave a 100 grain bullet with the 47 grain load of H4831 a vel. high of 3093 and a low of 3o65. Pretty much in line with the Hodgdon chart.
    Being a cautious person, I loaded for the new Marlin, two at a reduced load of 45 grains, then to 46 grains. At the range the 45 worked fine and I could see no difference in the 46 grain loading.
    Then I happened to look up the Hodgdon data on the net. 100 grain bullet, H4831, starting load of 39.2 and a "maximum" load of 43 grains!!! Amazingly, they show the load of 43 grains as giving a vel of 2973.
    Oh, I can hear you out there; different powder now.
    Yes, there is a difference between the old war surplus H4831 and the new Hodgdon H4831, but the difference is the opposite way!
    When the new cannistered H4831 came out, I tested it against the old war surplus. Five rounds of the traditional load of 60 grains in a 270 with 130 grain bullet, five of the old powder and five of the new, with everything identical, except the powder. The old war surplus H4831 gave just over 100 fps more, than did the new H4831!

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    366
    Or you could look up some of Ackley's loads, they're right off the charts, I must say that I'm surprised that you went with H-4831 instead of H-4895.......Ben

  3. #3
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    19
    Well, these are the loads I've used for many years, in various rifles and calibres, so they are only off the chart as compared to the manuals edited by lawyers.
    H4895---Hm, gotta think about that!

  4. #4
    Member CheeseBurger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Calgary, AB
    Posts
    40
    Quote Originally Posted by M.T. Chambers View Post
    I must say that I'm surprised that you went with H-4831 instead of H-4895.......Ben
    But them his name wouldn't be H4831, now would it!

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    366
    I'm just pullin' his puddin', we're friends from way back, on that "other place".

  6. #6
    Member CheeseBurger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Calgary, AB
    Posts
    40
    Oh, I know, I belong to that other place too. I just couldn't help my self!

  7. #7
    .223 REM hometownhero's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Saskatoon
    Posts
    43
    The hornady manual lists that powder and bullet weight from 42-45.5gr and 2800fps-3000fps. This is for the new powder.
    hustlin since 1984

  8. #8
    The Gunsmithing Moderator blacksmithden's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    I live among the creatures of the night (Edmonton)
    Posts
    15,687
    Bruce...someday, I'm going to get my hands on a good photocopier...I'm going to load it into my pickup and come for a visit and copy all of your info. Like you said....you've got data that is pre-lawyer rewrite. In other words, invaluable. That needs to be preserved.
    GOC moderator
    Dealer/co-founder/co-owner of Tundra Supply Ltd.
    www.tundrasupply.ca
    The High River Gun Grab - NEVER FORGET !!!!
    Feb 26 2014 - Swiss Arms prohibition and ordered confiscation by the RCMP - NEVER FORGET !!!!!

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Sask.
    Posts
    2,046
    I tend to look at current start load data then work up a load that i consider safe in my rifle. I put a 243 together for a friend, the barrel was very tight and we couldn`t come close to any loads i used in mine, the powder is only one variable to consider when working up a load. By the way this is my first post on this site, just joined up 15 min ago.

Similar Threads

  1. Got a response from the Hill Times
    By tdod101 in forum Canadian Firearms News, Headlines and Polls
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 09-07-2018, 03:56 PM
  2. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 03-29-2018, 08:11 PM
  3. PAL RENEWAL TIMES
    By BUCK45 in forum General Firearms Discussion
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 03-24-2014, 10:27 PM
  4. BC CFO wait times
    By Strewth in forum General Firearms Discussion
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 07-21-2013, 06:28 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •