.303 Ballistic Coefficient - does it matter?

Caydel

Caydel

Regular
EE Expired
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Location
Eastern Ontario
Hi all!

I'm preparing to start reloading for my No. 1 Mk III*. It has the original sights on it. Planning on buying a Lee Loader and just neck sizing.

If I understand correctly, the MK VII .303 ammo issued had a ballistic coefficient of .467. This rings true, due to the Hornady 174gr FMJ BT having a BC of .470 (the boat tail being slightly more efficient than the flat base MK VII.

Looking at hunting bullets - I'm considering either the Hornady Interlock 150gr SP or the 174GR RN bullets. However, the SP has a BC of .361, and the RN has a BC of only .262.

So, my question - I want the original military sights to be reasonably accurate. Which bullet (150gr SP or 174gr RN) would most closely track the ballistic curve of the original military bullet? Obviously, I realise a fair amount has to do with powder / velocity achieved as well.

I appreciate any advice or suggestions!
 
Military sights were never “right on” for range as ammunition was mass produced. Original sights were “close” at war shots fired impose a lot of fear, sometimes more than impact.

I suggest you reload what works snd learn the sights to your load.

SCG
 
OP, I'm willing to bet your rifle will shoot better with ''flat base, spire point" 174 grain soft point, bullets at close to maximum velocities that are appropriate for your rifle.

The difference between round nose and spire points at the ranges you're likely to shoot won't be noticeable as far as point of impact or energy delivered on target.

None of the hype is relevant until you start shooting beyond 300 meters, which wouldn't be advisable with iron sights.

One thing to realize, with experienced shooters, it's been proven that iron sights can be just as accurate at 100 meters as a scope sighted rifle. Lots of trials were done back in the day to prove this. I'm going on about acceptable hunting accuracy of course.

Neck resizing will definitely help

Instead of buying a Lee Loader, which is about as fast as the 2nd coming of Christ, I would suggest you look at a Hornady hand held press kit.

Higginson's out of Hawkesbury, Ont sells them and has them in stock.

You can store the whole kit, dies, bullets, press, powder in a small tackle box, if you're pressed for space. The only thing you might need would be a small digital powder scale.

Hornady also makes one of those, which would be just fine for your needs, around $60

You can very likely get a complete set up of reloading kit, powder, primers, dies, scale under $250.

As for bullet efficiency, likely you won't be shooting much past 100-200 yards with those open sights.

At those ranges, ballistic coefficient is almost moot. There isn't a game animal in North America that would notice the difference.

One thing you really need to do with that old warhorse is to slug your bore, to measure its diameter.

Many of those barrels were made under stressful conditions and diameters can vary from .308 to .315+.

Most of the bullets available these days measure .310-.312

There was a time, when CIL used to produce bullets for the 303 Brit that bullet diameters available for them went from .310-.315.

If your bore is on the large side, don't expect to get good accuracy out of the rifle.
 
Although you are likely trying to spend least dollars possible, might want to consider Woodleigh Weldcore PPSN - I have some in 174 grain - on the box, says .312" and B.C. is .362. They are flat base, with a more or less flattened "tip" - a Protected Point. From my teenage years, unless you are good at "tuning" the lips on a 303 British magazine, the pointy tips on most rounds are going to get beat to crap, when chambering, anyways.

Much Internet ink has been spilled about reloading 303 British - it is a rimmed cartridge, so some people overlook that the chamber, etc. is set up differently than a standard "bottle neck" cartridge. If you check the "headspace" - the gauge is only checking the space for the rim of the case - in these, headspace has nothing to do with the chamber shape or size. Was apparently a British war time thing to deliberately enlarge the chamber body - allowed dirty or bent cases to be chambered and fired without completely splitting - was their only concern - fire it once, extract it, and on to the next "new" one - no concern whatever whether the fired one could be reloaded or not. If you are going to re-load 303 British, sooner or later a case will break off - body is stuck within the chamber - case head came out on the bolt face. Be prepared for that - there is a tool called a "broken case extractor" made to deal with that exact situation. There are other ways to get that broken case out without damaging the chamber, but gouging, etc. has very high likelihood of damaging the chamber walls. Chamber walls should look very smooth and shiny like a mirror.

The very first firing of new brass in your chamber will "set the stage" - read up about "o-ring" trick or other ways to make sure the case is all the way back, tight against the bolt face - that way, as it fires, that case will blow out and completely match your chamber shape, without stretching at the case head. Simply neck sizing previously fired brass might work for some - but if you have a "long" chamber, then your case head has been stretched back and will split. Basically, you want to transfer your "case fit" from relying on the "headspace" on the rim, to having the brass shoulder very close to the chamber shoulder. Trying to make it "headspace" on the case shoulder, without "incipient case head separation" instead of head spacing on the rim - Was not how it was designed, but was not designed to reload it either. For most cases, after a number of neck sizing, you will have to Full Length size or similar - the shoulder will have "grown" forward far enough, that it has to be addressed. If initial firing did not match to the chamber without stretching at the head, might not get to re-load it enough times to discover that.

Sights and sighting - I think that you can find on Internet that WWII (?) sighting from factories - battle sight - involved 5 rounds into a rectangle 1" wide by 1 1/2" high - at 100 feet - 33 1/3 yards - was "good to go", if it could do that. That would have been with standard WWII military loads. The aiming point, if I understood correctly, was the bottom edge of that rectangle - so all "holes" were above the front sight at that range.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for your thoughts all.

> Instead of buying a Lee Loader, which is about as fast as the 2nd coming of Christ, I would suggest you look at a Hornady hand held press kit.

I don't anticipate using much ammo - at most, occasional plinking for now. Speed of reloading is not a huge priority. I would be shocked if I go through 100 rounds per year. I probably wouldn't have even considered going down this road if .303 ammo wasn't unobtainable, at least anywhere nearby.

> One thing you really need to do with that old warhorse is to slug your bore, to measure its diameter.

That's on my 'TODO' list. I had the rifle checked out by a local smith, and he commented on the lack of wear, but nevertheless, I'll see what I'm dealing with in a more measurable fashion.

Thanks to all for the information so far!
 
Most Lee Enfields I have shoot high by 6 inches to a foot with factory ammunition. A taller front site will bring your point of impact down. A few different site heights where made so i ended up buying a few. If I am just shooting paper or steel gongs I make my ammunition match my sites. Hunting loads I usually have to put on a higher front site. A lot of good advice from the ones above. Max loads will decrease how many reloads you get out of a case. Mild loads will give you more reloads out of your cases. My lead bullet loads are low pressure so they can last quite a few reloads. I would recommend a single stage bench mounted press starting out. I have found that flat base bullets work a lot better. I use Hornady 150 gr SP flat base as my hunting load.
 
I have found the Sierra 180 grain Pro-Hunter [flat base] to be a great bullet for use in the 303 British.
Unless you have a very large groove diameter, [+ .314"] it is accurate and deadly on game.

Try IMR 4895, IMR 4064, IMR 4320, Reloder 15, VV N140 or 540, Ramshot Big Game, H335. Dave.
 
BC doesn't matter at all , nope.
I have killed animals with many different brands and types of bullets ranging in weight from 150 to 215 grains inside of 250 yards with the same results , antlers on the ground and hooves inThe air, all out of the same rifle .:cool:
Cat
 
Leatherstocking said:
About the speed of the Lee Loader:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UeEl9wZyabc

Richard Lee (rip) loads one round in 40 seconds. He doesn’t spend a lot of time measuring the powder to 1/10 of a grain, though.
Click to expand...

I've loaded hundreds of rounds on Lee Loaders and Wilson dies using both a mallet and an arbor press.

I've also used ''scoops'' from a Lee kit for measuring powder charges, without a scale.

The ammo from the Lee Loader was OK but nothing that would be satisfactory for me. If I was really careful, especially with the fill density of the powder measure, the ammunition was OK for hunting out past 100 yards. Even using the arbor press to assemble the loads I couldn't get the accuracy I wanted.

The Wilson dies were a completely different ball game. The brass required a lot more preparation and the dies had interchangeable neck rings.

The ammo from the Wilson dies was match quality and used as such. The powder was thrown from a Lyman Ideal powder dispenser, which consistently threw charges within a tenth of a grain of each other.

40 seconds, OK but can you do it??? Most folks can't

It's been my experience that I could gain speed with the arbor press, rather than the mallet. The arbor press also helped to keep the components loaded true to their axis, which equates to accuracy.
 
The challenge is making ammo that will group well. A flat base bullet is best. A pointed bullet feeds from the mag best (if that matters).

Once you get your load, change the front sight to the correct height to give you the zero distance you want.
 
I shoot a quarter mile and half mile with a few buds up at our dear camp. The current leader shoots military Enfield sights with 303 Hornady 150 grn bullets. Amazing... trust the gun and the 100 years behind it. He out shot us all with 308 and 6.5 Creedmoor with 12x scopes.
Dial it in to original specs of ammo. The open sights work well. Play with it and enjoy. There are many options and recipes out there.
 
Ganderite said:
The challenge is making ammo that will group well. A flat base bullet is best. A pointed bullet feeds from the mag best (if that matters).

Once you get your load, change the front sight to the correct height to give you the zero distance you want.
Click to expand...

Yes, and as stated slug the barrel.

Those guns were meant to go bang. Nothing more.

SCG
 
Southcountryguy said:
Yes, and as stated slug the barrel.

Those guns were meant to go bang. Nothing more.

SCG
Click to expand...

I'm not dissing you here but that just isn't true.

Those rifles had a minimum accuracy requirement with issue ball ammo that had to be adhered to.

One thing people don't take into account is how the bullets were constructed back in the day.

The twist rate was established at 1-10 to stabilize full metal jacket, 220 grain, round nose bullets, with exposed lead bases.

The exposed lead jammed into the bullet by pressures created during ignition, forcing the jacket into the rifling grooves and gave good accuracy.

All of my rifles chambered for 303 Brit shoot the 220grn roundnose, exposed core bullets I have very well, even the Lithgow No1, with a .315 bore.

150 grain flat base bullets of modern construction, shoot very well in rifles with .312 or less bores. I've had Pakistani No4 MkII rifles with .310 bores.

I have a No4 MkI sporter with a .309 bore and it shoots just about any weight bullet from .308 to .312 well.

For most of the 303 Brit rifles I've used, heavier, flat base bullets usually shoot better.

Of course, there are always exceptions, like the sporter with the .309 bore.
 
Oh, Enfields can shoot.. I took my 100 + year old sported rifle (with 6X scope) to the 200 y range last week. Had some handloads using plain jane Hornady RN bullets. Put 5 shots into 1 1/2 inches. Not bad for a steel butt pad and a 6 lb trigger. Meanwhile, the lad beside me was cussing and swearing over the 4 inch groups he was getting with his 2K$ precision rifle in 6.5 Creedmoor.
 
Southcountryguy said:
Yes, and as stated slug the barrel.

Those guns were meant to go bang. Nothing more.
Click to expand...

Unless the owner is planning on casting bullets for reloading, slugging the barrel will do nothing for him other than complicate life in general. Whatever it slugs, the commercial hunting bullets aren't going to change dimensions. Trial and error with the bullets that have accumulated a reputation for performing well on game will tell him what his best candidates are.

When some of my father's hunting partners seemed about ready to quit hunting because the old 215 grain loading for their Lee Enfield was no longer on the shelves, I loaded 30 caliber 220 grain Nosler Partitions for them. I don't recall much about the rifles, but you would presume the grip the rifling had on the bullets was tenuous at best. I was hoping for the obduration of the open bottom of the Partitions to pick up the slack. Whether that is what made it work or there was just enough bite from the rifling, or a combination of both, I don't know. But they shot well enough to hold minute of elk and moose for those old boys, and the last time I saw them decades ago, they were still shooting elk and moose in the bottoms along the Kootenay, Elk, and Bull rivers.

That said, there is a wee bit more to a Lee Enfield than the proclamation they were meant to do nothing more than go bang when the trigger was pulled. They are almost certainly the best bolt action battle rifle ever produced, and made the point by doing the job in battles for over a century. While putting meat on the table in civilian times.

You don't want to be 600 yards or so away from the business end of a Lee Enfield in good condition, with somebody trained and skilled in putting it to use for it's intended purposes behind the sights and trigger.
 
Caydel said:
Hi all!

I'm preparing to start reloading for my No. 1 Mk III*. It has the original sights on it. Planning on buying a Lee Loader and just neck sizing.
Click to expand...

Give yourself a bit of a head start by choosing Lee Collet Dies. There are few things made by Lee that have earned a permanent place on my reloading bench, but Lee Collet dies are one of them, particularly for the Lee Enfield rifles. Learn how to set them up to result in a slight crush fit when using the full length resizing die, and use the collet resizing die as long as possible before a trip through the full length resizing die is necessary.

The second thing you can do to give yourself a boost is to buy Privi Partisan brass for your reloading; it is about as good as it gets for .303 British brass.

If I understand correctly, the MK VII .303 ammo issued had a ballistic coefficient of .467. This rings true, due to the Hornady 174gr FMJ BT having a BC of .470 (the boat tail being slightly more efficient than the flat base MK VII.

Looking at hunting bullets - I'm considering either the Hornady Interlock 150gr SP or the 174GR RN bullets. However, the SP has a BC of .361, and the RN has a BC of only .262.

So, my question - I want the original military sights to be reasonably accurate. Which bullet (150gr SP or 174gr RN) would most closely track the ballistic curve of the original military bullet? Obviously, I realise a fair amount has to do with powder / velocity achieved as well.

I appreciate any advice or suggestions!
Click to expand...

There are assorted statements out there on what the BC of the ball ammo is. Many reloaders as well as Sierra and Hornady have tried replicating it. While I don't hunt with Lee Enfields, a lot of Service Rifle guys really like the 180 grain Sierra's for accuracy. That's a pretty good referral for a hunting bullet as well, being a GameKing instead of a MatchKing.

How far do you forsee yourself shooting with that rifle? 300 yards with those open sights; how serious about accuracy over the range do you intend to get?

You are going to have more variation due to human error, the precision of alignment of those open sights, etc than you are going to have variation due to differences in BC, particularly once you start reloading for accuracy with whatever bullets you choose. If you load attempting to match velocity rather than loading for best grouping ability, then you are playing a sucker's game.

The Mk III was to be zeroed with MPI 3/4" above POA at 25 yards, MPI 3" above POA at 100 yards. Nine different front sight blade heights, each change up or down a front sight size producing a change of 1.87" in POI from the previous size (I assume the hundredths of an inch change in POI is theoretical at best).

Were it my rifle, I would first select what I felt was the best hunting bullet for the rifle, whatever the weight or the design, then make some trips to the range with my reloads, to find what grouped best with 10 shots at 200 yards. I would then change out/file down the front sight so that the rifle was zeroed with my best reload at 200 yards on that sight setting. With that, you should be good from spitting distance all the way out to 300 yards - if you can shoot that rifle with those open sights beyond 300 yards effectively, you're a better man than most.
 
I am still that lee loader guy for the neck size part of it ...haha.

shoulder bump die every 3 reloads or so. As long as I have a peep (no4 or p14, not always as consistent with my no1 because of the leaf sight) I can hit the 12" steel almost always 10 for 10 out to 225,as far as my range goes.

Never slugged any bores. Although the no1 is an aussie, and they always seem to shoot good.

Trying boat tails in the no1 and p14. Can't in the no4, as its a 2 groove.

Learn your hold overs...I don't load quite to mk7, but the sliders seem to be on at 225 still. The p14 shot like a foot high at 100...so I just used a taller front sight. Just remember my slight up hold at 225.

With ppu brass i can get about 6 to 7 reloads with just bumping shoulder back every 3 or 4. I do use a lee fcd if there is no cannelure.

Bullets? Campro, Sierra, speer, hornady, and ppu boat tails at 180grns...all hit for me at 200+ very consistently. At 50 yards I overlapped 2 of 3 on my windage test with the campros on the no4. Good enough for this cat. But then again, I never was a Supreme accuracy chaser though. Unless its reaaaly bad ill dig into the bedding etc
 
Last edited:
Snider shooter said:
Most Lee Enfields I have shoot high by 6 inches to a foot with factory ammunition. A taller front site will bring your point of impact down. A few different site heights where made so i ended up buying a few. If I am just shooting paper or steel gongs I make my ammunition match my sites. Hunting loads I usually have to put on a higher front site. A lot of good advice from the ones above. Max loads will decrease how many reloads you get out of a case. Mild loads will give you more reloads out of your cases. My lead bullet loads are low pressure so they can last quite a few reloads. I would recommend a single stage bench mounted press starting out. I have found that flat base bullets work a lot better. I use Hornady 150 gr SP flat base as my hunting load.
Click to expand...

I have this problem with a p14 Enfield, groups well but is 10” hi at 75 yds. Anybody know where I can get a taller front sight blade? PM me
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom