Using Bullseye in the .30-'06 Without Blowing Yourself Up!
- Thread starter Outpost75
- Start date
Charles Graff
Moderator Emeritus
I read it first in the Fouling Shot and am very glad it showed up here. This time I saved it to my Ed Harris file on my hard drive.
JWFilips
Well-Known Member
Thank You for posting: that is a good article & I have squirreled it away in my important documents! ...as to the title of the thread ...Well your not going to blow yourself up.
I have shot my 8 mm mausers with as little as 2.5 grains BE & a 175 gr boolit. One of my ultra light loads works out to be 3 grains BE and a 130 gr NOE bullet.
also 3.0 grains is very shootable with a 175 grain Lee; but my most enjoyable load with that boolit is 6 .1 grains Bullseye Very accurate out to 75 yrds.
I would think the 30-06 can't be too far off these loadings since the velocity would be higher
I have shot my 8 mm mausers with as little as 2.5 grains BE & a 175 gr boolit. One of my ultra light loads works out to be 3 grains BE and a 130 gr NOE bullet.
also 3.0 grains is very shootable with a 175 grain Lee; but my most enjoyable load with that boolit is 6 .1 grains Bullseye Very accurate out to 75 yrds.
I would think the 30-06 can't be too far off these loadings since the velocity would be higher
KHornet
Well-Known Member
I have used bullseye in rifles sparingly on rare times in ctgs up to and including 06, however I do not like to use it by choice, as double charging is ALWAYS possible. Mostly, I have used it for fire forming cases, K'ing hornet brass in particular, but have used it in formed 8MM from 06, and 243 from 308 brass, and way back some 270 & 35 Whelan, from 06 brass because as stated a little goes a long way, and I am cheap. My rules of thumb are as follows when doing same: All cases must be the same mfg, and preferably the same batch number and or weigh within 1 grain of each other. Regardless of how careful I am I know that a double charge is possible, AND I once blew up a good 06 because of that (I believe)!
Accordingly, after I seat the bullet, but before crimping (if I need to crimp) I weigh each loaded ctg. I expect to be within 1 grain +/- on the loaded case. Any variance above that and I pull the blt, to discover my error. Since adopting this procedure (which takes a lot of extra time), I am much more comfortable that I have minimized the danger potential, and maximized the safety potential. Feel that there is also the potential for increased accuracy with this procedure, but that may be just me. I do this with all of the fast shotgun type powder loads in cast rifle loads. Also, that said, I have made it a point with all cast loads of 2400 and slower powders that fill less than half the case to weigh the loaded case. By half of the loaded case, I mean that I fill the case to the mouth, weigh the powder, and divide the charge by 2. I shoot a lot of Ed Harris' loads for initial testing of new bullets, and have yet to find any problem with his recommendations. Being an old codger and retired allows me the time to be able to use my these procedures. It is kind of like the old saying "measure twice cut once"!
Accordingly, after I seat the bullet, but before crimping (if I need to crimp) I weigh each loaded ctg. I expect to be within 1 grain +/- on the loaded case. Any variance above that and I pull the blt, to discover my error. Since adopting this procedure (which takes a lot of extra time), I am much more comfortable that I have minimized the danger potential, and maximized the safety potential. Feel that there is also the potential for increased accuracy with this procedure, but that may be just me. I do this with all of the fast shotgun type powder loads in cast rifle loads. Also, that said, I have made it a point with all cast loads of 2400 and slower powders that fill less than half the case to weigh the loaded case. By half of the loaded case, I mean that I fill the case to the mouth, weigh the powder, and divide the charge by 2. I shoot a lot of Ed Harris' loads for initial testing of new bullets, and have yet to find any problem with his recommendations. Being an old codger and retired allows me the time to be able to use my these procedures. It is kind of like the old saying "measure twice cut once"!
JWFilips
Well-Known Member
Yes you are correct there. Multiple charging with small amounts of powder is serious. Whenever I load with light charges ( and I do load a lot of them) When my charge goes ito the case that case is placed in a second cartridge tray
on a different table ( My reloading room is very small) so all I do is pivot my chair back & fourth between the tables. Empty cases in one area and charged cases in another This has worked out well for me for years.
Now if someone comes down & starts talking to me, I stop what I'm doing….sometimes I will even dump the charged cases to be sure there was no mistakes.
I do like your case sorting & weighing procedure …that is very safe.
on a different table ( My reloading room is very small) so all I do is pivot my chair back & fourth between the tables. Empty cases in one area and charged cases in another This has worked out well for me for years.
Now if someone comes down & starts talking to me, I stop what I'm doing….sometimes I will even dump the charged cases to be sure there was no mistakes.
I do like your case sorting & weighing procedure …that is very safe.
JWFilips
Well-Known Member
It doesn't always come down to economics: I have light loads with bullseye in my rifles that far exceed the accuracy of slow rifle powders with the same cast boolits. What it comes down to is the best shooting lightest load that will let me enjoy my rifle without putting my shoulder ( & neck in my case) in traction.
If I can shoot a 125 Grain boolit in my 35 marlin with 336 with 5 grains bullseye accurately & enjoyable for a few hours vs. getting my neck & shoulder pounded with a service load of 3031 with a 200 grain boolit even if it shoots as well I'm going with the wimpy training round. Paper or steel targets can't tell the difference but my body can. But that is just me
If I can shoot a 125 Grain boolit in my 35 marlin with 336 with 5 grains bullseye accurately & enjoyable for a few hours vs. getting my neck & shoulder pounded with a service load of 3031 with a 200 grain boolit even if it shoots as well I'm going with the wimpy training round. Paper or steel targets can't tell the difference but my body can. But that is just me
Hmmm I am cheap, frugal what ever you want to call it also. Started casting because of the price of jacketed, expecting just mediocre results. After a bit of fooling around I now expect no less than jacketed accuracy from a cast bullet. High standards to some but it has given me good end results.
Soft shooting accurate loads, I shoot the same types myself. But let's see I have any where from $1000-1500+ in several of my shooter service rifles. Powder is $32 a lb otd around here.
I myself refuse to press into service a powder that there is absolutely no data for in that type of burn rate.
There was a gent bouncing around from web site to web site some years back announcing that blue dot was the only powder that one needed. He was loading everything from .22 hornet to 7mm mag with excellent accuracy.
I like my finger and eyes let along my guns.
It took me a long time to get over using 2400 in a bottle neck case and I am still leery of it.
Mild recoil with excellent accuracy and no danger of a double let alone a triple charge is my reason of wondering why the halting of sr 4759. They say a one years run of 4759 would sit on the shelves for several years before being sold.
It either went farther thus less poundage being used or there was little to no use of it by shooters or the military.
I just think there are better safer powders out there for reduced loads.
You gents carry on and be safe.
Jeff
Soft shooting accurate loads, I shoot the same types myself. But let's see I have any where from $1000-1500+ in several of my shooter service rifles. Powder is $32 a lb otd around here.
I myself refuse to press into service a powder that there is absolutely no data for in that type of burn rate.
There was a gent bouncing around from web site to web site some years back announcing that blue dot was the only powder that one needed. He was loading everything from .22 hornet to 7mm mag with excellent accuracy.
I like my finger and eyes let along my guns.
It took me a long time to get over using 2400 in a bottle neck case and I am still leery of it.
Mild recoil with excellent accuracy and no danger of a double let alone a triple charge is my reason of wondering why the halting of sr 4759. They say a one years run of 4759 would sit on the shelves for several years before being sold.
It either went farther thus less poundage being used or there was little to no use of it by shooters or the military.
I just think there are better safer powders out there for reduced loads.
You gents carry on and be safe.
Jeff
Josh
Well-Known Member
I have shot lots of Bullseye loads with my larger rifles. Most of the time it is with very light bullets. I have found i am more comfortable shooting 10 gr of unique or 16 gr of 2400 in my rifles larger than 30-30.
I have a dedicated rifle to shoot tiny charges in, the case is so small i have used 1.7 gr of bullseye with a 150 gr cast bullet
I have a dedicated rifle to shoot tiny charges in, the case is so small i have used 1.7 gr of bullseye with a 150 gr cast bullet
45 2.1
Active Member
Hmmm I am cheap, frugal what ever you want to call it also. Started casting because of the price of jacketed, expecting just mediocre results. After a bit of fooling around I now expect no less than jacketed accuracy from a cast bullet. High standards to some but it has given me good end results.
Soft shooting accurate loads, I shoot the same types myself. But let's see I have any where from $1000-1500+ in several of my shooter service rifles. Powder is $32 a lb otd around here.
Enjoy that high priced powder. A lot of times people can't find what they want to shoot and have to go with something else. "Either learn to use what you can find or go without" is the new byword now.
I myself refuse to press into service a powder that there is absolutely no data for in that type of burn rate.
Sometime a few decades ago a certain powder manufacturer would give out data for all the usable powders for a cartridge/bullet weight. That doesn't happen now, but some of us have a lot of older data so we know what to expect. Just because you can't find any data doesn't mean that someone else doesn't have it.
It took me a long time to get over using 2400 in a bottle neck case and I am still leery of it.
I really like the oft mentioned 16 gr of 2400 in the 30 calibers. You go to the Lyman manuals and a lot of the time it isn't even there and when it is, it's below the recommended starting load. Lyman put starting loads there for a reason, but most don't even look at the data.
Soft shooting accurate loads, I shoot the same types myself. But let's see I have any where from $1000-1500+ in several of my shooter service rifles. Powder is $32 a lb otd around here.
Enjoy that high priced powder. A lot of times people can't find what they want to shoot and have to go with something else. "Either learn to use what you can find or go without" is the new byword now.
I myself refuse to press into service a powder that there is absolutely no data for in that type of burn rate.
Sometime a few decades ago a certain powder manufacturer would give out data for all the usable powders for a cartridge/bullet weight. That doesn't happen now, but some of us have a lot of older data so we know what to expect. Just because you can't find any data doesn't mean that someone else doesn't have it.
It took me a long time to get over using 2400 in a bottle neck case and I am still leery of it.
I really like the oft mentioned 16 gr of 2400 in the 30 calibers. You go to the Lyman manuals and a lot of the time it isn't even there and when it is, it's below the recommended starting load. Lyman put starting loads there for a reason, but most don't even look at the data.
Just discussion here gents that is all.
My line of thought falls into the newbe that has little if any experience to speak of. Then has read very little on the subject.
I have a pretty large amount of reference material, from the mid 40's to date. You have to admit at certain times there is some very questionable data out there, by today's standards.
With phones in hand on ones person and computers in every other room of the house, there are modern tools to do reliable test that in years past were educated guesses at best.
I am as cheap as anyone here. I have some winchester shotgun powder that hi have looked high and low for pistol data with no luck. If I didn't have about 10 lbs of the stuff I would have dumped it. I did find reference to one load for 38 special. It is stuck on the back shelf for now.
Heck we want to holler about the price of powder, I get mad about the price of gas checks. Let alone primers.
My stash of BE will stay for my bullseye use. I lucked into a big buy with some other guys years back of 2200, wc820, 4895, a clone of sr4756 and several others I forget. A chronograph will tell you a fair bit for home use. And it will tell you more than most folks understand.
45 2.1 you are very correct on the load data comment. It seems as only the most popular calibers get included in any data any more. I always liked the little up date flyers that were around most gun shops, the flyers seem to be a thing of the past as well as a lot of small gun shops.
Jeff
My line of thought falls into the newbe that has little if any experience to speak of. Then has read very little on the subject.
I have a pretty large amount of reference material, from the mid 40's to date. You have to admit at certain times there is some very questionable data out there, by today's standards.
With phones in hand on ones person and computers in every other room of the house, there are modern tools to do reliable test that in years past were educated guesses at best.
I am as cheap as anyone here. I have some winchester shotgun powder that hi have looked high and low for pistol data with no luck. If I didn't have about 10 lbs of the stuff I would have dumped it. I did find reference to one load for 38 special. It is stuck on the back shelf for now.
Heck we want to holler about the price of powder, I get mad about the price of gas checks. Let alone primers.
My stash of BE will stay for my bullseye use. I lucked into a big buy with some other guys years back of 2200, wc820, 4895, a clone of sr4756 and several others I forget. A chronograph will tell you a fair bit for home use. And it will tell you more than most folks understand.
45 2.1 you are very correct on the load data comment. It seems as only the most popular calibers get included in any data any more. I always liked the little up date flyers that were around most gun shops, the flyers seem to be a thing of the past as well as a lot of small gun shops.
Jeff
I think it's a matter of everything isn't for everybody. Some folks do fine experimenting with fast powders in rifle cases and if they have an understanding of what they are doing all is good, others will get the willy's at the suggestion. I'm like that with duplex loads, I have no problem with others using these loads if they feel they have the experience & knowledge to do so safely but it isn't my thing. I don't feel that I have nearly knowledge to know what effect one burn rate could have on another and don't do it. It's also something I have little interest in messing with, that doesn't mean it's wrong, it means it's something I don't mess with. Small charges of fast powders in rifle cases is the same thing, fine for some not so much for others.