Removing the GC on the Lyman 311413?

[Grump]

Otherwise sometimes known as the "Squibb bullet", it runs 160-170 gr depending on alloy and casting technique.

I remember reading a 1960s NRA report that no matter how hard cast, it tended to lose accuracy at 1600 FPS or so. Under that speed, 1950s reports in '06 and similar rifles ranged from 1 to 2 MOA with the right, not too fast, loads out to 200 yards.

So my thoughts are that the moderate velocities suitable for that bullet might make the gas check superfluous... It's a single-cavity mould. Why slow production more by putting on gas checks if the performance might not really need them? Thus I am tempted to have an appropriate professional open it up and convert it to plain base.

I've tried a few loads without the GC but accuracy is, um, not so good as in 4 MOA or so. But I have not really tried that many loads because of the lubed base space factor. THAT's as slow as adding the GC!

So, whaddya all think about this idea?

 

[Ben]

From Oct. 26, 2012

I shot my 311413 plain based bullet today.I was pleased with how the bullet shot.
I have no idea whether or not this is the best my rifle will shoot with this bullet.

I loaded up 20 rounds , all with the same powder charge, all with bullets sized .311".

I'll experiment more later to see if there is a different propellant and charge that the bullet likes even better.

 

[Rick]

So, whaddya all think about this idea?

Erik at Hollow Point Mold Service.

www.hollowpointmold.com

Very highly recommended, the man is a true artist working on molds.

 

[Ben]

Ditto on Erik.

 

[Ian]

Depending on the size of the nose at the base and which alloy/powder you choose, that bullet is good for some impressive velocities. Don't take what the NRA had to say as gospel any more than any other source of information.

 

[Grump]

Ben:
My Google-fu finally kicked in (I had the mould number!) and I found that post of yours maybe an hour after starting this thread.

Interestingly enough, my first attempts with that one were with the last dregs of original Ball-C that my Dad bought in a paper sack out of a barrel (cardboard???) in a gunshop in Pocatello about the time he left the Marines. He was interested if a load could be worked up to cycle the M1 Garand. Nope. No chrono then, but accuracy pooped out with our alloy (BHN 12-13) and lubes about the time we could get ejection but not feeding. Both M1s had full match tuning and cycled fine with regular ammo even without any lube...for 7 shots. Something about that last one...

Ian:
How impressive is "some impressive velocities"? Is the GC needed for what you refer to??? I'm not sure they are even needed for our .30 Carbine loads at 1850+ FPS, but since those shoot to the limits of the barrels we have tried them in, I see no need to go PB for that other mould. But for the 311413, I'd be like a cow in tall grass if I could get better than 2 MOA from a good barrel at 1900 FPS or better, CG OR PB.

I doubt that any of my .30-bore rifles has a tube as good as Ben's Tikka. If/when I ever go into a 6.5mm, it's either a Tikka or the new Ruger Tac Rifle (especially if that stock fits me).