A good day shooting cheap, plentiful, affordable 303 British

[steelgray]

Feel free to correct me here because I haven't tried the trick of just dumping the X39 powder load into a 303 British case and topping it off with an AK boolit. However the consensus from those who've done this is that it results in a round that is less powerful than 7.62x39 and so is way down in power compared to the 303 British original.

Beyond that, people are talking about inconsistent velocities and the need for crimping and dacron - still not adding-up to a good outcome.

My take on this is that I note that my Lyman 50 manual says that the max load of 1680 for a 123 gr. projectile in a 7.62x39 case with 1680 powder is 25.7 grains and provides 2,412 fps at the muzzle. Then, Quick load tells me that, in a 303 British case, the max 1680 load for a 125 gr boolit is 34.1 grains - and launches that 125 gr. projectile at 2,500 fps.

34.1 divided by 25.7 is about 1.33. The burn rate of 1680 is probably about the same as that of the standard Russian AK powder so I figure, if one were to dump the equivalent of one and a third AK charges of AK powder into a single 303 British case, then one would expect to get about 2,500 fps out of your resultant 125 GR. 303 British round.

Note: I'm SIMPLY just applying ratios here to get the result. Other issues like whether AK powder has the exactly the same energy density as 1680, or how many Russian fairies can dance on a pinhead, etc. are not really the issue here - as far as I can see.

What is wrong with the idea of just doing this trick - i.e. one-and-a-third donor AK powder charges into each 303 British case, topped-off with the addition of the donor cartridge boolit.

Obviously, you'll be short of powder if you do a bunch (or you'll have extra boolits left over). Specifically, using his approach, 100 donor rounds would have enough powder to load 75 303 British rounds - and you'd have 25 donor boolits left over, in need of powder. I suppose you could, then, load those 25 extra boolits into 303B cases with 34.1 grains of 1680. With a bit of luck, the AK-powdered 303B rounds and the 1680-powdered rounds would shoot the same (both doing a useful 2,500 fps, hopefully with low shot-to-shot variation).

Please note for those who can't or won't read, I'm NOT talking about mixing powders - or anything weird like that.

I just bought a whole bunch of 7.62x39 Norinco ammo for $10 a box. That would mean that a resultant box of 303 British would be costing me ($10x1.33) or $13.30 EVEN if I threw the extra, unused 125 grain boolits away (which I wouldn't do). Does this approach make sense to you?

What do you think? Has anyone tried this?

You're getting that spread because you aren't using a filler, such as Dacron fiber, which costs appx $2.50 for a sq meter and is 1 cm thick. Cut it into 3 cm x 1 cm lengths and put one length on top of the powder, before seating the bullet.

This keeps the powder against the primer, for an even burn rate and consistent velocities.

Keep in mind, there is a lot of ''free bore'' with the light 125 grain bullets and if your rifle has a larger bore diameter, say .313in plus ????????????

 

[old303]

You probably don't know what the AK powder is, or anything about it other than that the amount found in each case was deemed suitable for that round. So I wouldn't be at all comfortable rule-of-thumbing a quantity that should work in .303 British. And if you're going with a ratio between a 7.62x39 load from one source to a .303 British load from another source then it's not just the cartridge difference, it's how brave each source was feeling and how many lawyers they had to feed. Going in the wrong direction there could be a problem.

 

[steelgray]

I wouldn't START at AK load times 1.33, of course. I'd try the 1680 303 Quick load -10% first and check for pressure. Once I'd determined the Quick load 1680 to be safe, that would be my "reference load" - i.e. the known safe load that I was trying to match - in terms of performance - with the unknown Russian powder.

Then, I'd go with AK powder load plus 20%, then 22 percent etc. - and see how the unknown powder compared to the verified 1680 "reference load" - in terms of comparative drop and in terms of pressure signs and report (as well as velocity, if I got out my crony). The hope would be that I'd come-up with the "AK plus" load (as a percent over the AK standard charge) that gave the same performance as the reference 1680 Quick load. If this work-up got me to a point where I found that the "reference" 303 British 1680 Quick load matched the AK scaled-up load - and if I found that the latter shot well - that would be the ticket.

The standard trick of going with a dump of a AK case of unknown Russian powder into a much larger, primed 303 British case is presumably something that people also arrived at by experimentation, but clearly isn't the ideal solution.

In fact there are those who think that a bottleneck cartridge, loaded with a clearly-underpowered charge of an unknown powder is also not entirely desirable - from a safety perspective - but that seems to be the standard approach here. A 303 British case "uploaded" with more than an standard AK charge could actually be technically safer and better. (as long as one doesn't go too far).

Also this, is presumable similar to how we arrived at the now-commonly accepted practice of making 303 Brit rounds from donor 7.62x54r cartridges re-using the original boolit and the original 54r powder - less 7 grains.

 

[nowarningshot]

Comparable medium slow to slow powders....imr 4350-h4350-imr4831-h4831. Imr 4831 isn't much slower than h4350. Take the first and last though and your a ways apart....probably 2-3 grains difference for max load. Even at today's scalper prices for powder, the most hard to find premium powders.....retumbo, varget, h1000, a few of the slow reloder powders.....40-50cents/round. Powders suitable for 303british aren't those premium scalper $, unicorn to find powders.

Personally any unknown 50yr old Russian surplus is getting folded into the garden compost. Even more basic than one primer/powder on the bench at a time, and not shooting someone else's reloads....don't blow your face off.

 

[old303]

I wouldn't dump 50yr old Russian surplus into the garden. It goes into the backstop at the range, and the "brass" into the garbage bin, during a range trip with a Mosin or SKS.

 

[Andy]

There are a number of detailed threads from the past 10 years or so about using both 7.62X39 and 7.62X54 components (both bullet and powder) in the 303 Brit.

For example:

https://www.canadiangunnutz.com/for...ing-7-62x39-bullets-and-powder-into-303-brit?

The downside has always been bullet diameter being 0.310" and 0.311" (or so), too small in most Lee Enfields to be very accurate, not to mention the powder not always lending itself to top accuracy.

 

[steelgray]

There are a number of detailed threads from the past 10 years or so about using both 7.62X39 and 7.62X54 components (both bullet and powder) in the 303 Brit.

For example:

https://www.canadiangunnutz.com/for...ing-7-62x39-bullets-and-powder-into-303-brit?

The downside has always been bullet diameter being 0.310" and 0.311" (or so), too small in most Lee Enfields to be very accurate, not to mention the powder not always lending itself to top accuracy.

Thanks for this! The former post from that earlier thread that comes closest to addressing my interest in making a 2500 fps 125 grain load from 7.62x39 boolits and original powder reads as follows:

<QUOTE>
I have done it lots with Czech x39. I think from 26ish grains I made it up to 36 grains before I had a stable load I was happy with. A simple swap will produce massive velocity spreads, mine were as high as 400fps. I am guessing "flashover" is supposed to be another name for secondary explosive effect, which outside some very rare circumstances is a myth and/or a common excuse for reloading screw-ups.

<UNQUOTE>

As I read this, that poster started with some Czech 39 surplus that had an original charge of something less than 26 grs and the poster tried loads from 26 to 36 grains - ending up with a stable load he was happy with at 36 grains.

The Norinco 39 ammo I have on hand seems to come with a 23.6 gr charge and the ratio model I have used to estimate the max for this donor cartridge (using known 1680 data as a proxy to establish ratios) seems to suggest that the max safe load of my Norinco 39 donor powder might be in the range of 23.6 times 1.33, or about 31 grains. Obviously - as I have noted - I wouldn't start at 1.33 times (duh!!!!). However, the poster who did similar testing seems to have had good results with his max load of 36 grains of his Czech ammos's unknown powder.

I'm going to follow a similar approach (increasing loads slowly from perhaps 26 grains) again and will compare performance against my standard 303 British load (current made-up from a 54r boolit and 54r powder, less 6.2 grains (which has worked GREAT for me). When the new "39 powder plus" load and my "54r minus powder" load start to provide comparable performance, I'll be happy. And to those random posters who never seem to miss a chance to say "you'll blow you face off" I just say ...

 

[B]

I am surprised you managed to find my old post. Good job. Just FYI I was "happy" with the chronograph data, i.e. no more wild velocity spread, but the accuracy was pretty poor.

 

[steelgray]

Thanks for the info. I'll note that. I hope that reworks of Norinco 7.62x39 surplus or Norinco 7.62x39 commercial (whichever my stuff is) will group better, ... but that's why we test, right?

I am surprised you managed to find my old post. Good job. Just FYI I was "happy" with the chronograph data, i.e. no more wild velocity spread, but the accuracy was pretty poor.

 

[jethunter]

You probably don't know what the AK powder is, or anything about it other than that the amount found in each case was deemed suitable for that round. So I wouldn't be at all comfortable rule-of-thumbing a quantity that should work in .303 British. And if you're going with a ratio between a 7.62x39 load from one source to a .303 British load from another source then it's not just the cartridge difference, it's how brave each source was feeling and how many lawyers they had to feed. Going in the wrong direction there could be a problem.

If you work up that load of the unknown powder in steps and use a chronograph I don't see a problem. The ratio is only to give a rough idea based on the volume. You wouldn't actually use the ratio for anything on it's own.

 

[B]

Too many guys focus on what could go wrong instead of just thinking of how to do it safely and intelligently. Most people that argue against this sort of thing can't be swayed because it's a black and white thing to them.

There is a French member here that operates like that. If it isn't in a manual it's completely unsafe according to him. Using a Magnum primer instead of a standard? OMG you are gonna die bud, because there is no safe way to do that without sending your load off to get tested...

 

[enefgee]

Re: "Mexican Match" - Many years ago, US snipers were forbidden from using HPBT ammo in their rifles while in the US, since they would not be using it in the field. They would shoot matches in Mexico, and in order to improve their odds they would pull the bullets from Match FMJ ammo and replace it with Sierra Match Kings. That ammo became known as "Mexican Match Ammo". It became a commonly used term for a round with a standard bullet replaced with a better bullet to improve performance.

 

[old303]

If you work up that load of the unknown powder in steps and use a chronograph I don't see a problem. The ratio is only to give a rough idea based on the volume. You wouldn't actually use the ratio for anything on it's own.

What threw a yellow flag on the play for me wasn't as much the ratio-between-loads idea itself, it was that one was a number out of Lyman and the other from Quickload, so you have an apples-to-oranges comparison there and I'd think you'd be on firmer ground with apples-to-apples or oranges-to-oranges dividing two numbers out of the same source.

But even in the same book there are entries that were added on different days with different methods and safety factors. Start low & work up, always, although going under minimum load isn't perfect fun either.

 

[steelgray]

The 555 Mohawk and the SVT 40 – on which it's based – both suffer from the same problem. The gas system provides an insane amount of adjustability and so can be set in a totally wrong setting by a stupid operator.

Guns like the SKS, or the M14 have no gas adjustments at all because they don’t need them. There has only ever been a narrow range of ammo specs for the cartridges they use. However, 7.62X54R is an archaic cartridge and Russian/ Soviet inventories in WW2 could still have included some original 220 grain ball (going and 2,000 fps) loaded with really early smokeless powders – from the 1890s – and well as sub standard loadings from other times, right up to more modern 149 gr. steel case steel core ammo, loaded to nearly 3,000 fps.

Federov Tokarav probably thought that he needed to give the SVT-40 guns enough adjustment to deal with such extreme variations with the ammo supplied and used AND also probably thought that providing extreme adjustment settings could be good - to allow the gun to temporarily be set to a more extreme opening – to compensate for a gas system that might have become almost completely blocked, in some battlefield situation.

HOWEVER, the difference between the gas opening from its smallest to biggest setting isn’t just the normal 20% – or whatever. Instead, the difference between the smallest and largest gas setting on both the SVT-40 and the Mohawk (that is setting 1.1 versus 2) is a difference of SIX TIMES the area of the gas port opening! This is because the area of a circle (or of a gas port opening) increases by the square of the radius of the opening (“A=πr2”).

Also, one assumes that the Mohawk gets a little more gas pressure at the gas block – because the people who re engineered SVT-40s to make Mohawks moved the gas port a bit closer to the chamber – in the way that one sees on any modern gun (as shown in a comparison between an M1 Garand and an M-14).

This means that – especially with the Mohawk, using standard 303 British loadings – it would be insane to use one of the really big gas openings to run the gun. However, I can tell you that neither the SVT-40, nor the Mohawk and sufficiently idiot proof. If you use a gas setting above 1.3 or so with either gun you will HOPELESSLY over-gas the gun. In this condition, if you are using 303 British ammo with that cartridge’s known brass weaknesses, you will rip off case heads, etc.

I have sorted out two Mohawks so far and corrected setting left by previous owners. Both of these guns now run perfectly with zero drama once the gas setting was corrected to 1.3; whereas one of the guns was obtained with the gas system WRONGLY set to 1.7 and frozen, in that setting, by rust.

Again, the gas system on both the SVT 40 and the Mohawks are not at all idiot proof. On the contrary, to clean the gun properly you have to take-out the five-sided gas adjustment screw and if you put it back wrong the gun is going to get either WAY too much or too little gas. And those gas setting markings are almost unreadable, even when one is indoors and in proper light. How could some unskilled/ undertrained Russian peasant conscript clean and properly reset the gas system of one of these guns in a fox hole in the winter?

The Russians were wise to discontinue the SVT 40 in the early part of the war because they lost many of these guns to the Finns in the winter war and didn't have the manufacturing capability to produce replacement SVT-40s in the necessary numbers. BUT also, I suppose that – by this time – they realized that the SVT-40 was too complicated a gun to give to the hoards of unskilled peasant soldiers who were being called into action. DITTO the Mohawk was WAY too demanding a gun to have been sold to and used by a North American bubba-type loser who may have diddled with the gas system, shot the gun once or twice with some corrosive surplus ammo and then left it to rot in a cupboard, uncleaned.

However, buy a Mohawk that hasn’t been totally misused by a previous owner, shoot it using clean, 303 British that is in-spec and leave the gas system at 1.2 or 1.3 and you will have a nice 100% reliable, drama-free gun. You shouldn’t own a Mohawk or an SVT-40 unless you own and know how to use ESSENTIAL gas adjustment tool. You literally can’t clean a Mohawk or adjust its gas system if you don’t own and use one of these.

 

[cantom]

I realize this is cleaner because you're using a better primer in your .303 brass, but has anyone had any luck pulling primers from the 7.62x54R or 7.62x39 round and using them in the .303 along with the powder and bullet? Otherwise the good primer you still need is the biggest cost and scarcest bit of the new load, and with the primer shortage I'd feel bad about wasting even a corrosive combloc primer.

Still feeling like an SKS or Mosin Nagant is what should be used to plink off their respective surplus ammo, and that a Lee Enfield should only be approached with good ammo.

Pulling live primers??? Not to mention corrosive, which is the reason for using new Boxer primed cases.

 

[B]

Pulling live primers??? Not to mention corrosive, which is the reason for using new Boxer primed cases.

I have removed and reused Boxer primers literally thousands of times with no issues. It's a benign practice. The fact Boxer and Berdan primers are completely incompatible is the only real issue.

 

[kjohn]

Great thread. I often pull bullets from 54r and use them and around 70% of the powder in .303 Br. Not entirely sure about “accuracy” as I mostly shoot offhand at a gong or a rock well off in the distance. I also use up the primed 54r cases by using a light charge of flake pistol/shotgun powder and an appropriate cast bullet and send them down range out of one of my old Mosin Nagants.

There is no more danger of things going wrong than any typical reloading operation. Just don’t be watching youboob or talking with a buddy. Common sense and a diligent method must prevail.

I have lots of both 7.62x54r and 7.62x39 on hand, so I will continue to shoot it off one way or another.

 

[Tyler]

I haven't resorted to pulling 7.62x54r to make .303 ammo. Still have enough powder/primers/.312 bullets to shoot them on occasion. The surplus gets used in my SVT and I'll occasionally 'Mexican match' some Hornady .312's into the surplus to feed the Mosin.

Since the shortage I've largely switched to surplus or .223/.22lr because my powder will last twice as long with .223.

What I am going to do is find some low pressure lead ammo components to sling from my No4 to really stretch the budget. Works for the 100m gong, and easier on the barrel.

 

[bearhunter]

I have removed and reused Boxer primers literally thousands of times with no issues. It's a benign practice. The fact Boxer and Berdan primers are completely incompatible is the only real issue.

I've removed Berdan primers that were live on hundreds of cases.

I've got a brass punch with two pins inset into the face. The punch is turned to a few thou smaller than the inside of the case necks, which keeps thing aligned as I turn it so the pins will enter the flash holes.

A light tap with a small hammer or a quick push from an arbor press wil pop out the corrosive primers, which are often duds, when they're over a century old.

Berdan primer diameters can vary, depending on who made them and when they were made.

I find that some of the Berdan primers today, just fall out of the pockets, even in cases that were never fired.

 

[bearhunter]

Pulling live primers??? Not to mention corrosive, which is the reason for using new Boxer primed cases.

This is true, when modern Boxer type cases are available.

I really like shooting my Kropatschek rifles and the only cases I've been able to find, are Berdan primed and 90 years old.

The first thing that happens, is I remove the primers, after pulling the bullets and flake type or the odd heavily compressed black powder. Then the case gets a good cleaning and goes through a full overall reannealing.

These cases have an odd sized Berdan primer that is available on occaision.