7.62x39mm .310 123 Gr FMJ into full power 303 British, or 7.62x54R

steelgray

steelgray

Regular
Rating - 100%
37   0   0
Location
Ottawa Valley - Ontario
I know that .311 projectiles are hard to find and expensive. The .310" lead core AK bullets that you can buy in bulk are affordable and easy to get. I wonder if anyone has had experience - good or bad - with reloading these in 303 British, or 7.62x54R?
 
Last edited:
Neither of these threads deal with making full power loads with 123 Gr projectiles. There's just a passing reference to Mexican sub-power loads. That is not the focus of this thread.

DiMP said:
Many people have used 7.62x54r projectiles, and in these threads there is some people making light loads using x39 projectiles for 303B

https://www.canadiangunnutz.com/for...ooting-cheap-plentiful-affordable-303-British

https://www.canadiangunnutz.com/forum/showthread.php/2324522-303-British-with-7-62x45r-millsurp
Click to expand...
 
steelgray said:
Neither of these threads deal with making full power loads with 123 Gr projectiles. There's just a passing reference to Mexican sub-power loads. That is not the focus of this thread.
Click to expand...

Sorry, you didn't mention full-power or light loads. Just making some suggestions based on previous reading I had done
 
I picked up a wack of 123grn .311 berry bullets. I'm just playing around with Reddot powder. I know my 308 using the 150grn BB, with Reddot powder gets me under a inch at 100.
 
For .303, it will depend on your bore. I've had a lot of .303 rifles that wouldn't stabilize anything under .312 and some that wouldn't even do that. 7.62x39 bullets have worked for me in a Mosin in the past.
 
Hornady .312 bthp are my go to bullet for everything X54r, slug your bore properly first.

Its my opinion that the 123gr suck sh*t because they are too short and conical to stabilize at any distance over 100 yards. If you pull a surplus steel core 123gr and compare to new commercial bullets you will find over a 1/4 inch difference in length. The length is the difference of having a bullet tumble or keeping true flight for any distance.
 
I shoot .310 steel jacketed/core pulled bullets in my .303 No4 MK1
Using inexpensive D4198 powder
I aimed for a similar velocity to my usual 180gr loads, around 2400fps
They are accurate in my particular rifle.
Some people have had poor luck with .310 bullets as there are differences in .303 bore diameters
 
So it think you are saying that if you must use AK bullets you are better off with pulled steel core ones rather than commercial lead core pills because the steel core ones are longer and stabilize better. If that is true then maybe the lead ones get "over-stabilized" (if that s possible) or they deform some how as a result of being spun faster than they were intended to be spun. Weird but interesting.

I can certainly imagine that longer is better when being loaded for a lee -Enfield mag.

Do you ever use the AK powder in 303 British or 54R reloading? How has that worked for you? I've heard you need to go up about 30% from the standard 7.62x39 powder to reload in the larger 303 British cases.

Surplus corrosive AK steel core ammo is still cheap and plentiful here in Eastern Ontario.

fiddler said:
Hornady .312 bthp are my go to bullet for everything X54r, slug your bore properly first.

Its my opinion that the 123gr suck sh*t because they are too short and conical to stabilize at any distance over 100 yards. If you pull a surplus steel core 123gr and compare to new commercial bullets you will find over a 1/4 inch difference in length. The length is the difference of having a bullet tumble or keeping true flight for any distance.
Click to expand...
 
I've done a bit more research on this. I still haven't tried using X39 steel core bullets in 303 cases using donor X39 powder, but I did shoot a few with H414 and they grouped well.

I used data from the Hodgdon Data manual Twenty-fifth Edition. It calls for a max of 49 gr. of H414 for a 130 grain lead bullet - while I used 47 Gr to launch a 123 Gr. steel core projectile.

Another poster said he tried 123 Gr. steel core AK bullets with an uploaded quality of the original AK powder (i.e. more than the powder load from one AK round) but that poster says he/ she got poor accuracy. I wonder if the difference is that steel core bullets need a slower powder to perform well in medium size cases? Maybe an overload of AK powder (say 1.3-1.5 times the powder load of a donor AK round) is a bad choice in a 303 British case 'cause that Russian AK mystery powder is just too dang fast (in a 303 Br. case) - and this undermine accuracy.

I noticed that my pulled steel core AK 123 grainers are actually a lot longer than my .311 Frontier CS gamemaster 174 grain plated lead core projectiles. I'm guessing that the .311 Frontiers plated bullets my actually run down the bore with less drag than the 123 grain AK projectiles as well - because the core is soft and the bullet needs less energy to deform to match the rifling grooves.

Maybe the extra energy required to launch a steel core projectile in a medium capacity case justifies the use of a slower powder - and that is the way to get AK bullets to shoot well in a 303 British gun. Just save the original AK powder for some other reloading project (involving smaller capacity cases) and push those steel core 123 gr. pills in a 303 British gun with a slower powder - like H414.


Maybe this explains why diananike got "good-ish" results with D4198 powder
 
Last edited:
I used D4198 because I wanted to use cheap powder and low charges to get a similar velocity to the 180gr bullets I usually use and hopefully shoot to a similar point of impact without adjusting the sights.
It worked very well.
At 50yds the bullets got to the exact same point as my usual load of 180gr Sierra soft points loaded with Reloader 15.
The charges of D4198 were in the mid 20gr range (don’t have my data book here).
With the 123gr steel core pull-down and the bulk D4198 I bought when it was cheap my reloading cost was very low.
They aren’t as accurate as the Sierra loads but acceptable.
My rifle handles the .310 surplus pulled bullets well but I have heard of other Lee Enfield rifles having bores that work better with .312 or even .314 bullets.
My impression is there’s a range of bore diameters in the different rifles.
 
Here's my mini range report. I used a 1918 Mk III* Sporter and a 555 Mohawk for testing. My control load was made of 174 Gr Hornady 174 gr lead core .311 FMJs pushed by 43.7 grs of H414.

I compared this to a load made of 123 Gr steel core boat tail FMJs from '75 surplus Russian 7.62x39 ammo pulled from former copper washed steel cases. These projectiles were reloaded in commercial boxer primed 303 British cases. The OAL was really the same as the control load and externally the ammo looked a lot like normal military ball (thanks to the fact that the steel core FMJs are long for their weight). One batch of these 123 steel core FMJs was loaded with 47 grains of H414 and another load used the Russian AK pull down powder. I went with 30% above the original powder charge from the original surplus ammo. The steel core pills shot nice consistent 4 inch groups (with both the surplus X39 powder and the H414 load). Both 123 gr steel core loads shot low - compared to the control 174 gr. Hornady loads, but the accuracy was definitely as good as the control load! The two 123 gr steel core loads were underpowered - just barely cycling the Mohawk and both loads were dirty. I'm going up on powder load for the load that reuses the original AK powder (i.e. original X39 donor round charge plus 40%) and I'm switching to a faster powder for my test load where I use pulled down 123 gr bullets and a commercial powder.

I'm specifically thinking of using BLC-2, 2460 or 1680 for the latter. My objective is to find the "secret sauce" where you can pull down AK rounds, to make 303 British that is as accurate as my 174 Gr. H414 reloads and has the same point of impact. I want to find a sweet spot where my load with pull down powder and bullet performs the same as my load made with AK donor bullets pushed by BLC 2 or 2460 or 1680. That way, I can shoot all X39 pull down-based 303 British reloads - and since I'll be short on powder - I can use a commercial powder to get the same performance for those extra x39 donor bullets.

I've had really good experience to-date recycling 54R components into 303 British reloads (and going that way, you end-up with spare powder left over) - but I like the economics of making 303 British reloads from surplus X39 ammo at least as much. I'm a fan of lighter flatter shooting bullets and I think the supplies of surplus X39 are going to last a lot longer than 54R - which is already getting less common. Here in Eastern Ontario you can still get surplus X39 anywhere for $10 a box of twenty, whereas, if you can find 54R, it is double that.
 
Last edited:
For me hitting similar velocity had a similar point of impact.
My loads for the M14 did not cycle the gun. D4198 just doesn’t have the gas pressure at the port that the gun was designed for.
I did essentially the same thing for 308 as 303 but used more powder to get closer to the 2750 that 7.62 NATO M80 ball gets.
Even with a 123gr .310 steel core pull-down the load works well in my manual action 308s.
 
steelgray said:
So it think you are saying that if you must use AK bullets you are better off with pulled steel core ones rather than commercial lead core pills because the steel core ones are longer and stabilize better. If that is true then maybe the lead ones get "over-stabilized" (if that s possible) or they deform some how as a result of being spun faster than they were intended to be spun. Weird but interesting.

I can certainly imagine that longer is better when being loaded for a lee -Enfield mag.

Do you ever use the AK powder in 303 British or 54R reloading? How has that worked for you? I've heard you need to go up about 30% from the standard 7.62x39 powder to reload in the larger 303 British cases.

Surplus corrosive AK steel core ammo is still cheap and plentiful here in Eastern Ontario.
Click to expand...

I fear for you.
 
steelgray said:
So it think you are saying that if you must use AK bullets you are better off with pulled steel core ones rather than commercial lead core pills because the steel core ones are longer and stabilize better. If that is true then maybe the lead ones get "over-stabilized" (if that s possible) or they deform some how as a result of being spun faster than they were intended to be spun. Weird but interesting.

I can certainly imagine that longer is better when being loaded for a lee -Enfield mag.

Do you ever use the AK powder in 303 British or 54R reloading? How has that worked for you? I've heard you need to go up about 30% from the standard 7.62x39 powder to reload in the larger 303 British cases.

Surplus corrosive AK steel core ammo is still cheap and plentiful here in Eastern Ontario.
Click to expand...



It means that a short conical bullet similar to a handgun bullet will begin to tumble quickly.
 
I have read about using x39 pull down bullets and powder most I have read use use the same change of powder from the x39 case. You don’t want to go about mixing the powder from different lot batches. I’d pull the bullet and pour it directly in the .303 case clean the projectile and seat it.
 
The information I’ve gathered from the web relating to Russian surplus ammo powders is below.

The main powder used in 7.62x54R has been produced in a standardize form since at least WWII and normally referred to as “VT”. The Bulgarians call the same stuff “SB 30” (or however you say that in , err .. Bulgarian). It is variously described as being similar to IMR 4895, H4895, and IMR 4064. People on the web say that you can get a yield of about 5.5 lbs of this powder by taking apart a case of 880 54R rounds. Obviously, when you take apart 54R ammo, you also end-up with – in the preceding example – 880 steel core, .311 diameter projectiles. I shoot these in my L-E - and I consider them to be great.

Others resize them to shoot in .308 bore guns. I personally wouldn’t jump at doing that because I suppose that the steel core isn’t compressible – and those who successfully resize these to .308 are presumably just thinning-out the very thick copper jackets. Thus, the resized projectile might, IMO, lack enough remaining extra thickness to conform to rifling.

Back when a case of 54R was easy to find and cheap obviously, getting 5.5 lbs of a powder similar to IMR 4895 and 880 reloadable .311 bullets was a pretty crazy deal. Now, at least where I live, you are a lot more likely to see a 1,100 rd case of 7.62x39 than a case of 7.62x54R. That case of X39 is going to yield 1,100 reloadable bullets and, say, 2.25 lbs of powder - and it will cost you around $550.

As for 7.62x39mm, generally a powder referred to as "WUFL" is used. The Bulgarians call the same powder “SB 43”. Now some 7.62x39mm is also being loaded with the same "SSNF" ball powder as is used in the 5.45x39mm. I suppose this X39 surplus powder might be a good choice in ammo that otherwise uses AA1680 or H335, but I have had the stuff work well in my 303 British.

I’m sure that there is someone out there just dying to flame me for even talking about “pull down” powders. To those I say, I have been using a non-spec powder as my “go-to” propellant for over a decade – because I bought a lot of it. What is this non-spec, scarry sounding powder called? SL47. Where did a get it? From a weird foreign-sounding place called “Hawkesbury”
 
steelgray said:
The information I’ve gathered from the web relating to Russian surplus ammo powders is below.

The main powder used in 7.62x54R has been produced in a standardize form since at least WWII and normally referred to as “VT”. The Bulgarians call the same stuff “SB 30” (or however you say that in , err .. Bulgarian). It is variously described as being similar to IMR 4895, H4895, and IMR 4064. People on the web say that you can get a yield of about 5.5 lbs of this powder by taking apart a case of 880 54R rounds. Obviously, when you take apart 54R ammo, you also end-up with – in the preceding example – 880 steel core, .311 diameter projectiles. I shoot these in my L-E - and I consider them to be great.

Others resize them to shoot in .308 bore guns. I personally wouldn’t jump at doing that because I suppose that the steel core isn’t compressible – and those who successfully resize these to .308 are presumably just thinning-out the very thick copper jackets. Thus, the resized projectile might, IMO, lack enough remaining extra thickness to conform to rifling.

Back when a case of 54R was easy to find and cheap obviously, getting 5.5 lbs of a powder similar to IMR 4895 and 880 reloadable .311 bullets was a pretty crazy deal. Now, at least where I live, you are a lot more likely to see a 1,100 rd case of 7.62x39 than a case of 7.62x54R. That case of X39 is going to yield 1,100 reloadable bullets and, say, 2.25 lbs of powder - and it will cost you around $550.

As for 7.62x39mm, generally a powder referred to as "WUFL" is used. The Bulgarians call the same powder “SB 43”. Now some 7.62x39mm is also being loaded with the same "SSNF" ball powder as is used in the 5.45x39mm. I suppose this X39 surplus powder might be a good choice in ammo that otherwise uses AA1680 or H335, but I have had the stuff work well in my 303 British.

I’m sure that there is someone out there just dying to flame me for even talking about “pull down” powders. To those I say, I have been using a non-spec powder as my “go-to” propellant for over a decade – because I bought a lot of it. What is this non-spec, scarry sounding powder called? SL47. Where did a get it? From a weird foreign-sounding place called “Hawkesbury”
Click to expand...

It isn’t just steel jacket and core in those bullets there’s a thin lead envelope between the 2. I wouldn’t pull and mix the powder and hope it’s all the same.
 
For a very accurate paper punching load in 303, I use the Campro Bullets (CAL. 32 115GR RNFP FCP), over 7 grs of Bullseye.
Cheap fun, and not much to clean up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom