Good Old .303, Who Anyone Use It?
- Thread starter northwoodslivin
- Start date
My father has carried a Parked 4 mk 1 with an old VX on it for as long as I can remember until i gave him a 308 as a fathers day gift, and has shot everything that lives in Ontario that is to my knowledge.
And he still tells me when he comes down to my gun room and looks around, that i should hunt with a 303, because it has never failed him.
Theres a lot of truth to that! Not to bad for a 90 year old gun!
I took his old 303 to the range to develop a load for it, that he has never used and i was shocked as to th accuracy at 100m with it.
And yes i would not be affraid to shoot anything with it, and in fact i shot my first bear with that rifle.
And he still tells me when he comes down to my gun room and looks around, that i should hunt with a 303, because it has never failed him.
Theres a lot of truth to that! Not to bad for a 90 year old gun!
I took his old 303 to the range to develop a load for it, that he has never used and i was shocked as to th accuracy at 100m with it.
And yes i would not be affraid to shoot anything with it, and in fact i shot my first bear with that rifle.
pharaoh2, My rifle is nearly identical to yours, minus the scope. I've never seen the need for one on mine yet. The stock is a repaint I did, I wasn't a huge fan of the nice shiny-blonde stock mine had. And I'm a firm believer of a rifle being a tool, not a wall hanger. And if you have to add a little permanent cammo, all the better.
Got the same.. an old #4 Jungle that Parker Hale did up. It was my first large bore rifle, and I've had it since I was 15. It's been so reliable that I have never bothered to get anything "modern". I dropped my first moose (in a swamp) with it when I was 16 at 300yards. Trust those old iron sights because they'll put you where you need to be. Everything on 4 legs that's had that rifle pointed at it has gone down after 1. They may not be the prettiest/lightest/most advanced rifles out there. But there is a reason that they are STILL out there. When you have a rifle that's coming close to 100 years old shortly, functions flawlessly, has a great bore and will still drop a moose at a moments notice, you know you have a winner. I challenge any of you to find a "modern" rifle that's still pushing bush in another century.
northwoodslivin, Great first rifle and don't be suprised if it's your last as well. It'll treat you right.
Got the same.. an old #4 Jungle that Parker Hale did up. It was my first large bore rifle, and I've had it since I was 15. It's been so reliable that I have never bothered to get anything "modern". I dropped my first moose (in a swamp) with it when I was 16 at 300yards. Trust those old iron sights because they'll put you where you need to be. Everything on 4 legs that's had that rifle pointed at it has gone down after 1. They may not be the prettiest/lightest/most advanced rifles out there. But there is a reason that they are STILL out there. When you have a rifle that's coming close to 100 years old shortly, functions flawlessly, has a great bore and will still drop a moose at a moments notice, you know you have a winner. I challenge any of you to find a "modern" rifle that's still pushing bush in another century.
northwoodslivin, Great first rifle and don't be suprised if it's your last as well. It'll treat you right.
- Location
- London,Ontario
- Location
- London,Ontario
I have for years hand loaded the .303 British with the plentiful .308 bullets, and found the accuracy to be good, and at par with .311 bullets. One have to exchange the .303 British, .311 expander, with a .308 expander in the .303 British, full lenght resizing dies in order for having a firm bullet grip.
More controversial, and stricly for the number 4 Lee-Enfield or P-14 rifles only, I have for years used the .308 Winchester reloading data, of a "turbo charged" .303 British, without any problems.
The reasons for my use of the .308 Winchester load date is simply, that many # 4 Lee-Enfield's have been safely converted to fire the .308 Winchester (7.62 Nato) cartridge, and since the .303 and .308 Wincherster have indentical case volume, I find that it is far easier and much cheaper to handload the # 4, using the .308 Winchester reloading data, rather than going through expense of changing barrel, clip and extracter of a fine .303 British, Lee-Enfield rifle
More controversial, and stricly for the number 4 Lee-Enfield or P-14 rifles only, I have for years used the .308 Winchester reloading data, of a "turbo charged" .303 British, without any problems.
The reasons for my use of the .308 Winchester load date is simply, that many # 4 Lee-Enfield's have been safely converted to fire the .308 Winchester (7.62 Nato) cartridge, and since the .303 and .308 Wincherster have indentical case volume, I find that it is far easier and much cheaper to handload the # 4, using the .308 Winchester reloading data, rather than going through expense of changing barrel, clip and extracter of a fine .303 British, Lee-Enfield rifle
More controversial, and stricly for the number 4 Lee-Enfield or P-14 rifles only, I have for years used the .308 Winchester reloading data, of a "turbo charged" .303 British, without any problems.
The reasons for my use of the .308 Winchester load date is simply, that many # 4 Lee-Enfield's have been safely converted to fire the .308 Winchester (7.62 Nato) cartridge, and since the .303 and .308 Wincherster have indentical case volume, I find that it is far easier and much cheaper to handload the # 4, using the .308 Winchester reloading data, rather than going through expense of changing barrel, clip and extracter of a fine .303 British, Lee-Enfield rifle
I hope i'm never sitting next to you at the range when your enfield goes kaboom. .303brit = .308win?
Snowhunter - please don't encourage people to use anything outside the standard reloading specs unless they are really expert reloaders.
I know lots of guys who have 'for years' done various loads with their guns that even they wouldn't trust in others rifles. And not all 303's are LE's.
It is outrageously dangerous to tell others to step outside of posted data and suggest its perfectly safe when, of course, it isn't. Unless you've tested the loads to measure ALL the variables and can perfectly predict pressures.
Please be a little more responsible in your posts on that subject - and make sure no one gets the idea that its is a safe or even sane thing for people to do unless they are VERY experienced. A 303 is not a 308.
I know lots of guys who have 'for years' done various loads with their guns that even they wouldn't trust in others rifles. And not all 303's are LE's.
It is outrageously dangerous to tell others to step outside of posted data and suggest its perfectly safe when, of course, it isn't. Unless you've tested the loads to measure ALL the variables and can perfectly predict pressures.
Please be a little more responsible in your posts on that subject - and make sure no one gets the idea that its is a safe or even sane thing for people to do unless they are VERY experienced. A 303 is not a 308.
Any 303 British rifle, with any load, can blow up if there are any foreign objects inside the barrel.
The .303 British, #4 Lee-Enfield military action and barrel are extremely strong, and therefore, many of them have succesfully been converted to fire the .308 Winchester,(7.62 Nato) cartridge, by various military forces, as well as gunsmiths.
When firing handloaded .303 British, using the .308 Winchester reloading data, I have never encountered any form for pressure signs, like flattened primers, case separataion or hard to extract fired cases. The case life is at par with standart .303 British handloads, using neck sizing only.
The .303 British, #4 Lee-Enfield military action and barrel are extremely strong, and therefore, many of them have succesfully been converted to fire the .308 Winchester,(7.62 Nato) cartridge, by various military forces, as well as gunsmiths.
When firing handloaded .303 British, using the .308 Winchester reloading data, I have never encountered any form for pressure signs, like flattened primers, case separataion or hard to extract fired cases. The case life is at par with standart .303 British handloads, using neck sizing only.
Snow...The #4 is a slick action, but it is not strong enough for a 308.
Also you will not get any warnings on the brass...just pieces of the bolt head, and bolt in your face.
I'm not kidding, and this topic has been covered here before, and with pics.
There is a P14 action for sale in the EE, buy it and put a 308 barrel/chamber on it, and you will have a way safer rifle (and a better shooter) IMHO.
Also you will not get any warnings on the brass...just pieces of the bolt head, and bolt in your face.
I'm not kidding, and this topic has been covered here before, and with pics.
There is a P14 action for sale in the EE, buy it and put a 308 barrel/chamber on it, and you will have a way safer rifle (and a better shooter) IMHO.
Last edited:
Snowhunter's suggestion of using .308 loads has been received as being foolish, outrageous, ill advised and downright dangerous, and he has been shat upon. Just out of curiosity, I thought I would check a couple of manuals, Hornady and Sierra. I am only going to refer to 150 and 180 grain bullets, because these weights are used in both calibres. I am also only going to refer to powders used in both. Loads listed are maximum.
Hornady, 150gr., .308 first, then .303.
IMR3031: 41.2;42.0
IMR4064: 44.9;43.5
Sierra.
IMR3031: 43.8; 42.0
IMR4895: 44.0; 44.0
IMR4320: 47.9; 44.9
H380: 51.8; 45.7
Sierra, 180gr.
IMR3031: 39.9; 38.8
IMR4895: 41.5; 42.0
Varget: 40; 38.4
IMR4064: 44.4; 40.7
You will notice that often there is little difference. In a couple of instances the load is the same.
Now, a few comments.
Case volumes are similar.
Backthrust is determined by the area of the inside of the rear of the case. For a given pressure level, a .303 case will generate less backthrust than the same pressure in a .308 case.
Lee Enfield rifles are long throated, longer than .308s tend to be. This tends to reduce pressure.
Snowhunter reports that he uses .308 bullets, rather than .303 ones. A .308 bullet will be at least .003 undersized in most .303 rifles, and much more undersized in others, because of the often loose bores found in .303 rifles. This will also tend to reduce pressure. .303 bullets could change things.
Snowhunter does not report which .308 loads he is using in .303 cases. If he is using IMR4895, the .308 load is also the .303 load.
I would be prepared to bet that Snowhunter's .308 loads, with .308 bullets are producing less pressure and less velocity than the same powder charge with a .303 bullet. Instead of steaming up the .303 by using these loads, the actual result is a loss of performance.
This does not mean that it is a good idea to make a general recommendation to use loads recommended for one cartridge in a different one.
Another point. No. 4 actions are quite strong, but not especially so. Military conversions were not to .308, they were to 7.62mm. There is a difference. The rifles were also used only with issue baall, not reloads, and not with .308 cases, which are thinner.
Something to think about.
Hornady, 150gr., .308 first, then .303.
IMR3031: 41.2;42.0
IMR4064: 44.9;43.5
Sierra.
IMR3031: 43.8; 42.0
IMR4895: 44.0; 44.0
IMR4320: 47.9; 44.9
H380: 51.8; 45.7
Sierra, 180gr.
IMR3031: 39.9; 38.8
IMR4895: 41.5; 42.0
Varget: 40; 38.4
IMR4064: 44.4; 40.7
You will notice that often there is little difference. In a couple of instances the load is the same.
Now, a few comments.
Case volumes are similar.
Backthrust is determined by the area of the inside of the rear of the case. For a given pressure level, a .303 case will generate less backthrust than the same pressure in a .308 case.
Lee Enfield rifles are long throated, longer than .308s tend to be. This tends to reduce pressure.
Snowhunter reports that he uses .308 bullets, rather than .303 ones. A .308 bullet will be at least .003 undersized in most .303 rifles, and much more undersized in others, because of the often loose bores found in .303 rifles. This will also tend to reduce pressure. .303 bullets could change things.
Snowhunter does not report which .308 loads he is using in .303 cases. If he is using IMR4895, the .308 load is also the .303 load.
I would be prepared to bet that Snowhunter's .308 loads, with .308 bullets are producing less pressure and less velocity than the same powder charge with a .303 bullet. Instead of steaming up the .303 by using these loads, the actual result is a loss of performance.
This does not mean that it is a good idea to make a general recommendation to use loads recommended for one cartridge in a different one.
Another point. No. 4 actions are quite strong, but not especially so. Military conversions were not to .308, they were to 7.62mm. There is a difference. The rifles were also used only with issue baall, not reloads, and not with .308 cases, which are thinner.
Something to think about.
Well it IS dangerous tiriaq - unless you really know what you're doing. I think people are discouraging anyone who's relatively inexperienced from doing it.
There's little difference between max load and 2 grains over max either, but it can mean the difference between a safe cartridge and one that's not so safe. And it may not be the first round that tells the story.
I have little doubt that people who're talented could safely use the data - but really if there's little difference.. why not just use tried and true known safe data?
Yeah, but would you be prepared to bet your life? Or worse, the life of some newb here for the first time just getting into reloading?
I'm not saying in the slightest it can't be done. I'm not saying snow isn't doing it now and having great success. I'm just saying that straying from published reloading data and 'switching' data between cartridges is much better left to experts, not people of low or even moderate skill. We have to remember our responsibilities to those who may be reading this and aren't skilled enough to do it safely. If people think there's no risk to it, they may wind up making a bad choice.
- Location
- Lakes District BC
this is just idiocrecy at its finest, why would you tell someone to do anything with handloading that may result in more than normal chance of a catastrophic failure of a firearm? I know a few people that are victims of such failures and 1 of them is a member of this board and can tell you its not very pleasant to get a eye full of fragmenting brass!
Is it really necessary to try and sqeeze every foot per second out of a cartridge? If you get to that point, shooting becomes more work and less fun. Not to mention more dangerous. The .303 British has been downing game far longer than the .308 Winchester. And it did it with game that the .308 could only dream about, with startling regularity. If anyone wants .308 performance, by all means shoot a .308. But don't try and suggest dangerous practices for the sake of a half inch flatter tragectory. Bullets in .303 diameter are designed with a certain velocity in mind. Why mess with a good thing?
Also über heavy loads as suggested by snow would stretch the brass, regular loads in most #4's are bad enough...I have to under load mine so I can get 5 or so uses out of them, when I tried some at max loads I got 1 or 2 uses out of them, before I start to get signs of head separation.
I know a guy on another board that was at the range a few years back when one of those special 308 Enfield blew up next to him...not fun.
Also don't get me wrong as I love the #4, but the locking lug, and Generous chamber tolerances make it a rather risking thing to overload IMHO.
Too bad Steve from 303 British wasn't still on this site, as I'm sure he would have more input.
I know a guy on another board that was at the range a few years back when one of those special 308 Enfield blew up next to him...not fun.
Also don't get me wrong as I love the #4, but the locking lug, and Generous chamber tolerances make it a rather risking thing to overload IMHO.
Too bad Steve from 303 British wasn't still on this site, as I'm sure he would have more input.
I quoted the maximum recommended loads from the Hornady and Sierra manuals because that would represent a worst case scenario. Maximum loads are not starting loads. Anyone who picks a maximum load to start with is asking for trouble. Less than maximum .308 loads are going to be within the recommended range for the .303. 40gr. of IMR4895 is a mid level load with a 150gr. bullet for both .308 and .303. With a .308 bullet in the .308 and a .311 bullet in the .303 velocities should be about 2500fps, in either calibre. Put an undersized .308 bullet in the .303 and the velocity is going to drop.
Snowhunter was being condemned because he recommended using .308 data for loading .303. We are in agreement that recommending substitution of data is a bad idea, and potentially dangerous. But no one bothered to check to see exactly how the data compared.
