Plinking Loads for 30-30. Use Filler?
- Thread starter hunter64
- Start date
The short answer is, it doesn't.
For loading full power rifle loads, lets say bottle neck cases, the most EFFICIENT loading, is with a type of powder that fills the case. This is because the rifle will get its best velocity with as slow a burning powder, as it can handle. In other words, if a case full, or nearly so, of powder will give it maximum desired pressure, it should also give it maximum velocity.
Now, about a partial case full of powder.
Sometime after WW2, some reloader said that less than a full case of the slowest of powders, in this case H4831, blew his rifle up. After no end of theories, it was decided that somethng called detonation, instead of burning the powder, blew the gun up. There was no end of reasons why this happened. Everybody got on the bandwagon and said not to load H4831 at less than a case full.
So, Bruce Hodgdon, the originater of Hodgdon powder, went to work in their lab. With their pressure testing equipment, he tested everyone of their slower powders at less than a case full, going right down to squib loads with them. Many hundreds of rounds were fired and I have the results of the test. He was unable to prove in the lab that any type of partial load with any of their slow powders, produced anything except normal pressures. That is, heavier loads gave more pressure, while reduced loads gave proportionately less pressure.
For the last hundred years reloaders have been producing reduced loads in their firearms, using partial case loads of every powder in existance.
Now, in our world of litigation and sue happy lawyers, every chicken little that starts to reload tells every other chicken little, that he must not load less than a nearly full case of powder, or his gun will blow up! Through some word of mouth among these chicken littles (the sky is falling, the sky is falling) it is now accepted "fact," among many, that a load should not be lighter than the given starting load in a loading manual.
What a crock of BS!!!!!
I will defy anyone to show proof that any partial load of fast, or medium burning powder, has ever in history, caused dangerous pressures in the gun.
OK, so what about the article that I posted? Does it not contain EXACTLY the PROOF you are requesting?
They produced dangerous pressures for a 38 Spl and was COMPLETELY dependant on powder location in the case. They used a widely accepted, light load of Unique and they used exactly the same load in each position. Or do those results not count?
They recorded pressures from 14,200 psi to 27,900 psi (38 spl SAAMI pressure is 17,000 psi, and 27,500 is max proof pressure)
Don't get me wrong, I am not saying the sky is falling. Just saying that simply because everyone has been doing the same thing for the past 100 years, doesn't mean it's right.
Last edited:
SandRoad, Your article was more about extreme positioning of the powder in the case. I have many times heard of people doing this with reduced loads in a rifle. They want to see if it effects accuracy, so they first tilt the rifle up for one shot, then down for the next, and so on.
Whether a filler should be used, or not, for normal position shooting, is pretty controversial. I have sure done a lot of them each way, and I do tend toward using a good filler for best accuracy.
I have been reading hosts of books and magazines on shooting for the last sixty years. That's right, six zero years.
I have never read a single account of anyone's gun blowing up from a reduced load of fast, or medium burning powder, in all that time.
When fantastic numbers of reduced loads, with every kind of powder made, have been fired for a hundred years, with no apparent harm, how can you possibly say, " -doesnt mean its right."
Whether a filler should be used, or not, for normal position shooting, is pretty controversial. I have sure done a lot of them each way, and I do tend toward using a good filler for best accuracy.
I have been reading hosts of books and magazines on shooting for the last sixty years. That's right, six zero years.
I have never read a single account of anyone's gun blowing up from a reduced load of fast, or medium burning powder, in all that time.
When fantastic numbers of reduced loads, with every kind of powder made, have been fired for a hundred years, with no apparent harm, how can you possibly say, " -doesnt mean its right."
I agree on the safety of those reduced loads with faster powders and you are absolutely correct, as usual, on the unproven detonation theories. My concern is with chamber ringing, what causes it, and how to prevent it, there are as many theories around as the aforementioned detonation theories. Most of the theories seem to centre on using wads and or fillers.
30/30 Reduced Loads
if you want a reduced load with a 30/30 and a 150 to 160 grain bullet with an MV around 1800 fps...AND a relatively full case...
then try 18 grains of SR 4759...
in a lot of testing in the old 30/30, I have found that it is also consistently the most accurate powder in a 30/30 case, even one that might have a barrel known for poor accuracy...
I have tested SR 4759 with bullet weights from 110 grain RN to 220 grain RN's and they all were giving unbelievable accuracy for a 30/30.. especially an old 1966 model that has been in the family since new...
SR 4759 is my Go To powder for the 30/30 anymore...
and SR 4759, the results won't matter, with a Large rifle or a large pistol primer...
seafire
if you want a reduced load with a 30/30 and a 150 to 160 grain bullet with an MV around 1800 fps...AND a relatively full case...
then try 18 grains of SR 4759...
in a lot of testing in the old 30/30, I have found that it is also consistently the most accurate powder in a 30/30 case, even one that might have a barrel known for poor accuracy...
I have tested SR 4759 with bullet weights from 110 grain RN to 220 grain RN's and they all were giving unbelievable accuracy for a 30/30.. especially an old 1966 model that has been in the family since new...
SR 4759 is my Go To powder for the 30/30 anymore...
and SR 4759, the results won't matter, with a Large rifle or a large pistol primer...
seafire
Henry Nierychlo
Supporting Dealer
- Location
- Surrey, B.C.
Hey Seafire
Are you the same Seafire that posted all the great Blue Dot loads on Accurate Reloading dot com??
Just Curious.
As for 30/30 Light Loads this load was past on to me awhile ago on this forum. I have been using it & think it's great. Hardly any recoil and quite accurate.
1) My "cheap, low-recoil, plinker or share with the kids" load is as follows:
-Speer's 100gr "plinker" bullet (semi-jacketed, so no leading) or
-Hornady or Sierra 110gr 30 cal round nose bullet. (cheap bullet)
-28gr. H4895 powder
-CCI Large rifle primer
Runs that 100 gr. bullet around 2100 fps, so its about equivalent to an M1 Carbine load. Accuracy is satisfactory, and POI at 50 yards is about what full power loads are at 100 yards, so no need to re-zero the scope.
I hope this is of some help.
Kind Regards, Henry
Are you the same Seafire that posted all the great Blue Dot loads on Accurate Reloading dot com??
Just Curious.
As for 30/30 Light Loads this load was past on to me awhile ago on this forum. I have been using it & think it's great. Hardly any recoil and quite accurate.
1) My "cheap, low-recoil, plinker or share with the kids" load is as follows:
-Speer's 100gr "plinker" bullet (semi-jacketed, so no leading) or
-Hornady or Sierra 110gr 30 cal round nose bullet. (cheap bullet)
-28gr. H4895 powder
-CCI Large rifle primer
Runs that 100 gr. bullet around 2100 fps, so its about equivalent to an M1 Carbine load. Accuracy is satisfactory, and POI at 50 yards is about what full power loads are at 100 yards, so no need to re-zero the scope.
I hope this is of some help.
Kind Regards, Henry
