303 ballistics, a question for the experts.

[bdft]

Luckily, everyone is an expert on CCN.
I was shooting my No1 Mk1 sporting rifle today, trying out loads at 25 yards. I got 3 rounds touching at 25, dead on point of aim, with a 150 grn flat based .312 bullet and 40 grns of 4895. At 50 yards the same load started to open up a bit but it was still dead on POA. At 100 yards the group was about the same as at 50 but it was 6 inches above POA. Tried again with 174 boattail .311 and got very similar results. What happened between 50 and 100? Theoretically the point of impact should be very similar at 25 yards and at 100, or so I thought.

 

[Cdn303]

Nope that is correct. If you were to take it out to 300yd, the POA would equal the POI. This is because they were sighted for a 300yds zero, with the bayonet on. At 100yds the bullet is still going up on its trajectory out to 300.

 

[bdft]

But this rifle isn't in battle rifle configuration. This is an early 1900's sporting rifle. Aftermarket rear 100yd and 200yd flip up sight and rear peep sight. Aftermarket sporting stock as well and rebarrelled with a shorter and, I think, heavier barrel. I had the rear peep sight set at 100 yards. Are you saying that this is the standard 303 ballistic track?

 

[smellie]

If it is an "early 1900s" sporting rifle, it will have been factory sighted for the .303 Ball Mark II, III, IV, V or VI cartridge. These had a common bullet weight of 215 grains and a common MV of 2060 ft/sec.

The Ball Mark VI was superceded by the Ball Mark VII in 1910. Ball Mark VII had a pointed 3-piece bullet of 174 grains weight, a LENGTH corresponding to the older Mark VI and a Muzzle Velocity of a nominal 2440 ft/sec. This produced precisely 2300 ft/lbs ME.

Ball Mark VIII was introduced specifically for the Vickers heavy MG and has a REBATED BOAT-TAIL bullet of 174 grins at 2550 MV. This does compare rather well with some modern loads, even though the ancient .303 might be obsolete. The superb MODERN, AMERICAN load for the 7.62 NATO in its M-118 Sniper/Match version, for example, produces 2550 ft/sec with a 173-grain bullet: MUCH more powerful; just ask anyone.

Some British and older Canadian sporting loads for the .303 produced as much as 2750 ft/sec with a 150-grain slug; 2700 was common.

Also, a factor you might not have considered is Barrel WHIP and the WAVE MOTION of a barrel under the stress of firing.

Nice shooting, though!

 

[Tinman204]

DANG IT, SMELLIE BEAT ME TO IT!! NOTICED AFTER I POSTED!!!!!

OP, you have to remember that barrel harmonics come into play when shooting a rifle. 25 yards is way too close for ammo testing, 100-200 is usually more appropriate.

Now back to barrel harmonics. Diffent bullets will exit the barrel in different ways. Some will exit as the barrel is flexing up while others will exit on the barrels way down.

What cdn303 is saying is correct, the bullet is exiting on the barrels way up causing it to hit slightly high at 100 yards. By 200 it will probably hit low or dead on buy 300 it will probably be very low.

For instance last weekend I was shooting my Ross mkIII at a 300 yard gong at the range. The load I was using was 38.5 gr of 4895 behind a 174gr RN FB bullet. This load is very similar to the factory ammo but slightly slower in velocity. I started with my sights at 250 which caused the bullet to hit 10" high, by the 3 round after lowering it 2 more times I hit the gong at point of aim. I looked at my sights and they read 110 yards on the scale.

When I'm shooting targets @ 100 yards I put my sights at 80 yards and hit dead on every time. So according to my factory Ross sights, an extra 30 yards on my sights account for 200 yards further distance.

I experienced this with one other lee enfield that day as well, had the sights at 100 yards and hit the gong low but center every time.

 

[bdft]

Ball Mark VIII was introduced specifically for the Vickers heavy MG and has a REBATED BOAT-TAIL bullet of 174 grins at 2550 MV. This does compare rather well with some modern loads, even though the ancient .303 might be obsolete. The superb MODERN, AMERICAN load for the 7.62 NATO in its M-118 Sniper/Match version, for example, produces 2550 ft/sec with a 173-grain bullet: MUCH more powerful; just ask anyone.
!

Do I detect a note of sarcasm?

It sounds like I need a heavier slower bullet or a taller front sight as the rear peep sight is already at the bottom and the leaf sights are nonadjustable. I have some Mk VII Ball I was going to try but of course I forgot it. I see the Bullet Barn has some 200 grn cast that might be a good place to start.

BTW, I only shoot at 25 yards to establish what kind of group I'm going to get. If an old rifle shoots a 6 inch group at 25 yards there is no point of going out to 100.

 

[tokguy]

As far as military cartridges at close range there was a really cool article in the Handloading magazine about the rise and fall in popularity of the 6.5 Mannlicher.
At the turn of the century these were quite popular for big game in Africa. The only loadings available were milsurp FMJ's...how did they kill so well?
At the rate of twist on these rifles; the long, thin bullet hadn't stabilized at the closer ranges big game was harvested at in the late 1800's(no decent optics right?)
Hence the bullet would tumble upon hitting the elephant, lion or what have you ( generally at 50-70 yds)
As soon as they deviated from the military loading by acquiring the newest aftermarket game lods, they lost all magical killing power.
Short version? Need to replicate the military loading I suppose.
OP, begging your pardon for the tangential reply.

 

[Rumpelhardt]

You know I could never figure out the big over the top love affair some seem to have with the .308 Winchester. It's almost obscene the way some are towards this round.
Not that I don't think it is a great round. It will take about any game animal I'm likely to ever hunt and is a very accurate round with tons of options for reloading. I have a Remington 700 SPS Varmint in .308 After very little work has become the most accurate rifle I've owned to date and I like it a lot but I would attribute this as much or more to the rifle as I would the cartridge it's chambered for.
Some would have you think that the .308 possesses magical qualities that will guide the bullet to kills at ranges far beyond those any other round is capable of and deliver a killing blow at distances that you would be able to simply reach out and pluck any bullet fired from any other cartridge out of the air with your bare hands.
I actually spent one fruitless afternoon trying to explain to one of my brothers friends that generally the 30-06 all else being equal was a bit more powerful and flatter shooting than the .308 but he would have non of that. The military replaced the 30-06 with the .308 he reasoned so that must mean that the .308 is much more powerful and vastly more accurate a round. I didn't dare to even venture the opinion that the old .303 British was a match for his beloved .308. I think he probably would have blown a gasket.
You really can't fix stupid I guess.

 

[sunray]

"...an early 1900's sporting rifle..." Far more likely to be a milsurp that was sporterised at some time since W.W. I. Even with the civilian hunting sights.
First thing you need to do, if you haven't already is check the headspace. These rifles are notorious for having been assembled out of parts bins with zero QC. If the headspace is bad, you need to stop shooting it and get it fixed. Requires headspace guages and a handful of No. 1 Bolt heads. No bits of tape, empty cases or anything else.
Then you need to slug the barrel to find out its actual diameter. Lee-Enfield barrels can vary from .311" to .315" and still be considered ok. Then use the closest diameter bullet.

 

[bdft]

While I appreciate the concern for my personal safety et al, this isn't my first rodeo. All my other 303's more or less hit in the same place at 25 and 100 yards. Even my Martini Enfield. This is the first time I've encountered one that shoots significantly higher at 100 yards than at 25.

 

[smellie]

@SUNRAY: wake up and smell the coffee! Our sawmilling friend BDFT says he has an "early 1900s sporting rifle", so I am doing him the courtesy of assuming that he knows what he owns.

SOME Lee-Enfields were slapped together out of spares bins in the USA in the 1960s... but certainly NOT, back at ANY time before that. The vast majority of LE rifles ARE ex-military, and that includes my 1896 Sparkbrook (sportered in the early 1920s) and my A.G. Parker custom job, built originally in 1894, rebuilt in 1920; there is NOTHING wrong with them, nor with the manner in which they were assembled. According to YOU, almost a dozen Factories, BSA, Parker-Hale, George Gibbs, Holland and Holland, A.G. Parker, the Fultons, Alex Martin and several thousand Armourers didn't know what they were doing: give your head a shake! Remember, THESE were the last people to work on these rifles when they were Sold Out of Service, before they got to the local hardware store.

An old Machine-Gunner (Yukon Machine Gun Company, 1914 and Canadian Motor Machine Gun Brigade, 1918) once told me that, "There are 48 possible stoppages in the Lewis Light Machine Gun..... and 47 of them are in the Magazine!". Being that he LIVED long enough to tell me that, I would assume that he knew what he was talking about. And he was certainly RIGHT: ammunition problems account for nearly ALL "rifle problems". There is a great deal MORE time and attention expended in the manufacture of a thousand-dollar Machine Gun than there is in the making of a SEVEN-CENT Cartridge. Today, there is NO commercial ammunition made which duplicates precisely the Military Specifications for the.303 Ball Cartridge..... or even the CASING, for that matter.

Yes, bore and groove diameters DID vary during Wartime but nearly all of the really bad ones were changed-out during the massive FTR programs following the Great War, the Second World War and the Korean War. A combination of FLAT-based bullet and a quick powder brings MOST of the survivors under control...... as you have seem me post literally a HUNDRED times over the past eight years.

MANY ammunition problems and SOME Rifle problems may be bypassed for the cost of a simple Pony-tail Tie (one-fifth of a cent at your local Dollar Store, plus tax: not really excessive). Generally, this includes the numbing, terrifying, esoteric issue of HEADSPACE. Following the use of the Pony-tail tie on a Cartridge, you simply NECK-SIZE your brass, which now headspaces on the SHOULDER rather than on the often-defective RIM of the round.

@ BDFT, the Original Poster: Friend, I happen to like early .303 Sporters almost as much as I like the rifles from which many of them were made. Would you be so kind as to give us a nice photo or two of your rifle, one full-length and another of what markings might be on the Butt Socket..... and one of the Knox-form? Thank you. We'll get this sorted somehow.

 

[Tinman204]

@SUNRAY: wake up and smell the coffee! Our sawmilling friend BDFT says he has an "early 1900s sporting rifle", so I am doing him the courtesy of assuming that he knows what he owns.

SOME Lee-Enfields were slapped together out of spares bins in the USA in the 1960s... but certainly NOT, back at ANY time before that. The vast majority of LE rifles ARE ex-military, and that includes my 1896 Sparkbrook (sportered in the early 1920s) and my A.G. Parker custom job, built originally in 1894, rebuilt in 1920; there is NOTHING wrong with them, nor with the manner in which they were assembled. According to YOU, almost a dozen Factories, BSA, Parker-Hale, George Gibbs, Holland and Holland, A.G. Parker, the Fultons, Alex Martin and several thousand Armourers didn't know what they were doing: give your head a shake! Remember, THESE were the last people to work on these rifles when they were Sold Out of Service, before they got to the local hardware store.

An old Machine-Gunner (Yukon Machine Gun Company, 1914 and Canadian Motor Machine Gun Brigade, 1918) once told me that, "There are 48 possible stoppages in the Lewis Light Machine Gun..... and 47 of them are in the Magazine!". Being that he LIVED long enough to tell me that, I would assume that he knew what he was talking about. And he was certainly RIGHT: ammunition problems account for nearly ALL "rifle problems". There is a great deal MORE time and attention expended in the manufacture of a thousand-dollar Machine Gun than there is in the making of a SEVEN-CENT Cartridge. Today, there is NO commercial ammunition made which duplicates precisely the Military Specifications for the.303 Ball Cartridge..... or even the CASING, for that matter.

Yes, bore and groove diameters DID vary during Wartime but nearly all of the really bad ones were changed-out during the massive FTR programs following the Great War, the Second World War and the Korean War. A combination of FLAT-based bullet and a quick powder brings MOST of the survivors under control...... as you have seem me post literally a HUNDRED times over the past eight years.

MANY ammunition problems and SOME Rifle problems may be bypassed for the cost of a simple Pony-tail Tie (one-fifth of a cent at your local Dollar Store, plus tax: not really excessive). Generally, this includes the numbing, terrifying, esoteric issue of HEADSPACE. Following the use of the Pony-tail tie on a Cartridge, you simply NECK-SIZE your brass, which now headspaces on the SHOULDER rather than on the often-defective RIM of the round.

@ BDFT, the Original Poster: Friend, I happen to like early .303 Sporters almost as much as I like the rifles from which many of them were made. Would you be so kind as to give us a nice photo or two of your rifle, one full-length and another of what markings might be on the Butt Socket..... and one of the Knox-form? Thank you. We'll get this sorted somehow.

That was so good I had to quote it so others could read it again!

 

[bdft]

@ BDFT, the Original Poster: Friend, I happen to like early .303 Sporters almost as much as I like the rifles from which many of them were made. Would you be so kind as to give us a nice photo or two of your rifle, one full-length and another of what markings might be on the Butt Socket..... and one of the Knox-form? Thank you. We'll get this sorted somehow.

When I get out of camp this weekend I'll post some pics. While I think I know what I have I could be sadly mistaken.

 

[Mike Webb]

The 6.5 was introduced in 1900 as a sporting rifle and was loaded in 160 grain soft point and full metal patch loads. WDM Bell killed hundreds of elephants with the 160 grain solid. Original twist was 1 in 9 inches, plenty to stabilize those long for calibre bullets. A keyholed bullet will not penetrate at all and the 6.5 made it's name by wading meat as did the 6.5 Swede(160 grain) and the 7x57(175 grain) loads.

As far as military cartridges at close range there was a really cool article in the Handloading magazine about the rise and fall in popularity of the 6.5 Mannlicher.
At the turn of the century these were quite popular for big game in Africa. The only loadings available were milsurp FMJ's...how did they kill so well?
At the rate of twist on these rifles; the long, thin bullet hadn't stabilized at the closer ranges big game was harvested at in the late 1800's(no decent optics right?)
Hence the bullet would tumble upon hitting the elephant, lion or what have you ( generally at 50-70 yds)
As soon as they deviated from the military loading by acquiring the newest aftermarket game lods, they lost all magical killing power.
Short version? Need to replicate the military loading I suppose.

Not a lot to do with the OP's question but this information is off base. The 6.5x54 Mannlicher was introduced as a sporting rifle in 1900. Original loads were 160 grain soft nose and solids. W.D.M. Bell and many others had amazing success in Africa with the 6.5. Bell shot literally hundreds of elephants with the 160 solid. Factory twist was 1 in 9 inches which stabilized the long for diameter bullets perfectly. He switched to the .275 Rigby(7x57) because he couldn't find reliable ammo for the 6.5 any longer. The 6.5mm did possess magical killing power for it's size and still does. Any talk of unstable bullets tumbling in flesh is pretty much BS. A keyholed bullet will not penetrate for beans no matter what the calibre and penetration was the secret of the 6.5. The 6.5x55 Swede(160 grain) as well as the 7x57(175 grain) still have a reputation for wading a lot of meat as well.
OP, begging your pardon for the tangential reply.

 

[tokguy]

The article I was referring to was about the 6.5 X 54R I believe. It was referring to the split bridge rifle that was around in the 1890's.
Just reviewed the article this morning.
It had magical killing power because as long as you didn't hit a bone the bullet would be in perfect condition if recovered from the carcass. Yet it would drop large animals as well as the big calibers.
It didn't hit the animal keyholed but true; it just yawed quite handily after impact at close range as it hadn't stabilized yet.
But then again it's merely an opinion I suppose. Some folks that write for Handloading magazine could be full of BS , I'll still pay the money to read it as they usually are pretty close to the mark.
Stay safe
PS And I did politely beg the OP's pardon for the tangential reply BTW.
Just thought that the stay as close to the military loading in Milsurps message from the article was similar is all

 

[tootall]

Ball Mark VIII was introduced specifically for the Vickers heavy MG and has a REBATED BOAT-TAIL bullet of 174 grins at 2550 MV. This does compare rather well with some modern loads, even though the ancient .303 might be obsolete. The superb MODERN, AMERICAN load for the 7.62 NATO in its M-118 Sniper/Match version, for example, produces 2550 ft/sec with a 173-grain bullet: MUCH more powerful; just ask anyone.

Some British and older Canadian sporting loads for the .303 produced as much as 2750 ft/sec with a 150-grain slug; 2700 was common.

I gotta print that out and staple it to my cousin's forehead!

 

[Mike Webb]

Just pointing out like you said, the article was opinion but professional hunters don't use lousy equipment. It affects the bottom line.
Don't know how I managed two replies, one included in your text and one separate both saying the same thing.
Gotta lay off the Captain Morgan's, I guess.

The article I was referring to was about the 6.5 X 54R I believe. It was referring to the split bridge rifle that was around in the 1890's.
Just reviewed the article this morning.
It had magical killing power because as long as you didn't hit a bone the bullet would be in perfect condition if recovered from the carcass. Yet it would drop large animals as well as the big calibers.
It didn't hit the animal keyholed but true; it just yawed quite handily after impact at close range as it hadn't stabilized yet.
But then again it's merely an opinion I suppose. Some folks that write for Handloading magazine could be full of BS , I'll still pay the money to read it as they usually are pretty close to the mark.
Stay safe
PS And I did politely beg the OP's pardon for the tangential reply BTW.
Just thought that the stay as close to the military loading in Milsurps message from the article was similar is all