Mark VII bullets or equivalent?
- Thread starter Potashminer
- Start date
- Location
- Western Manitoba
^ Yep - I looked through their website offerings - but not finding .311" Spitzer (pointy) FMJ 174 grain with exposed lead in the base. Is .311" and .312" bullets, Round Nose (with flat base) and Spitzer FMJ BT, in similar weight and diameter - not a replacement for Mark VII bullet profile, though.
Nope, I don't believe anyone makes bullets with exposed lead cores anymore. Even IVI quit making them a few decades ago.
You know, today just about every barrel that's manufactured will have bore diameters within a half thou of mean spec or tighter.
We've gotten used to that and most new shooters don't understand why the bullet manufacturers of yesterday would construct bullets in such a fashion.
Anyone who shoots firearms more than 20 years old knows the bore diameters of their firearm could quite easily be a few thou large or if they're lucky, right on mean spec. The same for chamber dimensions.
Manufacturers of components, such as bullets knew this and had learned from the very first days jacketed bullets became the rage, they had to find a way to make those bullets fit the bores tightly.
I remember the days when CIL made thirty caliber bullets that ranged from .300 in diameter in .001 increments up to .350 in diameter.
Of course, most of them were special orders and it could take up to a year to get them, snail mail both ways, plus set up time etc.
There was a profitable market for this sort of production back then.
Now, the only way you can get odd-sized bullet diameters is by contracting with a custom, usually home-based business or making them yourself.
I've had 303 British rifles, especially Lithgows with .318 bores. No way a .311 or .312 bullet will shoot well, without some means of expanding it to fit the bore.
Those exposed lead bases did a very good job of this.
The rifles may not have been tack drivers but they shot acceptably with issue ammunition.
We've gotten used to that and most new shooters don't understand why the bullet manufacturers of yesterday would construct bullets in such a fashion.
Anyone who shoots firearms more than 20 years old knows the bore diameters of their firearm could quite easily be a few thou large or if they're lucky, right on mean spec. The same for chamber dimensions.
Manufacturers of components, such as bullets knew this and had learned from the very first days jacketed bullets became the rage, they had to find a way to make those bullets fit the bores tightly.
I remember the days when CIL made thirty caliber bullets that ranged from .300 in diameter in .001 increments up to .350 in diameter.
Of course, most of them were special orders and it could take up to a year to get them, snail mail both ways, plus set up time etc.
There was a profitable market for this sort of production back then.
Now, the only way you can get odd-sized bullet diameters is by contracting with a custom, usually home-based business or making them yourself.
I've had 303 British rifles, especially Lithgows with .318 bores. No way a .311 or .312 bullet will shoot well, without some means of expanding it to fit the bore.
Those exposed lead bases did a very good job of this.
The rifles may not have been tack drivers but they shot acceptably with issue ammunition.
It can't be that obsolete, I haven't been into a shop or store that sells ammo and doesn't offer a couple of different brands of 303 British
If the desire is for an accurate bullet, you want a jacketed flat base bullet. It could be a hollow point or soft point.
Obduration is not an issue. The yield strength of the jacket and led core is around 20,000 psi. When it is hit in the ass with 45,000 psi - it obturates just fine.
The blast of gas around the muzzle is important. A good crown and a perfect bullet base is required.
Only a real good barrel will work well with a boat-tail bullet. The average barrel works best with a flat base.
Obduration is not an issue. The yield strength of the jacket and led core is around 20,000 psi. When it is hit in the ass with 45,000 psi - it obturates just fine.
The blast of gas around the muzzle is important. A good crown and a perfect bullet base is required.
Only a real good barrel will work well with a boat-tail bullet. The average barrel works best with a flat base.
Butcherbill
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Blaster land, Okanagan BC
It’s not obsolete, it’s just been priced out of most peoples range as a volume plinking round. If all you do is buy a couple boxes to hunt with, it’s readily available. Otherwise Mexican match or casting is the best way to shoot your old .303 with any regularity.
Prior to Fauxvid and shortages/price increases I easily picked up 3 different brands of bullets and a handful of boxes of factory hunting ammo for relatively cheap prices, so I’m good on that front. Same with lead and components for cast loads.
Whoever decides to jump on the .303 bullet making band-wagon, hopefully they get it right this time, unlike almost all of the North American bullet makers.
The ONLY reason that current bullet makers make their bullets for the .303 British, of 0.311" is because of American 0.308" bullets, which barrels have a 0.300" bore & 0.308" grooves [0.300" + (2 x 0.004") = 0.308". I suppose they figured that if their .30 bullets should be 0.008" larger than the bore size, then .303 bullets should too.
Enfield barrels were rifled to use bullets of 0.316" (0.303 + (2 x 0.0065").
The ONLY reason that current bullet makers make their bullets for the .303 British, of 0.311" is because of American 0.308" bullets, which barrels have a 0.300" bore & 0.308" grooves [0.300" + (2 x 0.004") = 0.308". I suppose they figured that if their .30 bullets should be 0.008" larger than the bore size, then .303 bullets should too.
Enfield barrels were rifled to use bullets of 0.316" (0.303 + (2 x 0.0065").
Attachments
I just pulled a couple of "FNB" manufactured 303 rounds and measured the projectiles, they were both .3125" and were Boat Tail. FNB are well known to have produced some of the highest quality 303 ammunition most of us have ever sent down range. I also measured a projectile from the also excellent Greek "HXP" round. It measured .311". Both of these rounds are very accurate in my BSA #1 Mk3.
If the 303 projectiles needed to be .316" diameter, one of the ammunition manufacturers in the past 136 years would have produced them with that diameter by now.
As for current needs...Cinchaga bullets (now in Ponoka Ab.) used to produce a 174gr flat base match type projectile at I believe .312" diameter. They were not cheap, in quality or price. Not sure if he's still producing or not but he has the dies.
Speaking of dies, since none of the mainstream manufacturers appear interested in producing a decent flat base projectile, consider this... if a few guy's got together and ordered a bullet making die set from Corbin that duplicates the profile of the mk7 round, you can use them to bump up .308 match bullets to the mk7 profile. I had an acquaintance that had such a set made to .3125" diameter, and they worked perfectly for that purpose. Hornady 178gr h.p. match bullets reformed very nicely, and the boat tail was removed in the process. The main issue is that corbin has about a year wait list, and they were around $1000 U.S. for the full die set about 10 years ago. The die set mentioned has since gone into the abyss after the owner passed away. Still, it's a viable option, as reforming existing projectiles takes much less time than initial production.
If the 303 projectiles needed to be .316" diameter, one of the ammunition manufacturers in the past 136 years would have produced them with that diameter by now.
As for current needs...Cinchaga bullets (now in Ponoka Ab.) used to produce a 174gr flat base match type projectile at I believe .312" diameter. They were not cheap, in quality or price. Not sure if he's still producing or not but he has the dies.
Speaking of dies, since none of the mainstream manufacturers appear interested in producing a decent flat base projectile, consider this... if a few guy's got together and ordered a bullet making die set from Corbin that duplicates the profile of the mk7 round, you can use them to bump up .308 match bullets to the mk7 profile. I had an acquaintance that had such a set made to .3125" diameter, and they worked perfectly for that purpose. Hornady 178gr h.p. match bullets reformed very nicely, and the boat tail was removed in the process. The main issue is that corbin has about a year wait list, and they were around $1000 U.S. for the full die set about 10 years ago. The die set mentioned has since gone into the abyss after the owner passed away. Still, it's a viable option, as reforming existing projectiles takes much less time than initial production.
Last edited:
- Location
- Western Manitoba
After playing (or still playing with) an "odd ball" BSA conversion - the barrel is stamped as "proofed" for 270 Win - rifle has "H" prefix to serial number which I believe is correct for 270 Win by BSA - chamber and bore hole is about correct at 0.270" for a 270 Win cartridge - groove diameter however, is not - is 0.282", not the 0.277" that would be expected. Was probably a "left over" barrel from the .276 Enfield days, but no real way to know that. Various (brands and weights) jacketed bullets have been tried - about 3" or 4" groups at 25 yards - assumption is that those bullets are not "obturating" to fill those grooves. It might be something else, totally - currently sitting in a different stock - see if that makes a difference. Still to be attempted - is some flat base Nosler Partition here - exposed lead rear end - I am hoping those will "obturate" enough to get better groups. But I am dealing with a 0.005" difference between groove diameter and bullet diameter - that might be more than bullet "obturation" can accommodate? But would be similar if .311" bullet fired in a .316" groove. So far as I know, the Mark VII design was "good enough" to handle that, in a moderately accurate fashion - at least "good enough for government work".
Last edited:
Two jacked bullets have worked well for me. Hornady 150 gr flatbase pointed and Speer 180 gr flatbase RN. I shoot 303 British a lot and shooting jacketed stuff costs a bit of coin. I bought various moulds to try out and the Lyman 200 is what I found to work best. Cut cost down a lot.
Potashminer your barrel appears close to 7m/m. I would be trying jacketed or possibly cast in it. 0.282 and 0.284 isn’t much difference if loads are worked up. Would your neck be too large with a 7m/m bullet ? Only one way to find out, try and see if it fits. Another case of someone putting something together and trying to figure out what did I get myself into. I have a 303 barrel that has a tight neck so neck sized to 0.308 and 308 bullets used. Haven’t slugged the bore but does shoot well.
Potashminer your barrel appears close to 7m/m. I would be trying jacketed or possibly cast in it. 0.282 and 0.284 isn’t much difference if loads are worked up. Would your neck be too large with a 7m/m bullet ? Only one way to find out, try and see if it fits. Another case of someone putting something together and trying to figure out what did I get myself into. I have a 303 barrel that has a tight neck so neck sized to 0.308 and 308 bullets used. Haven’t slugged the bore but does shoot well.
- Location
- Western Manitoba
^ has been a while, but I do recall seating some 7mm (0.284") bullets into 270 Win cases, and they would not chamber in that rifle - so, to do that, I would have to ream out the neck area (or peel the neck walls of the cases). Was suggested to simply ream the thing out to 280 Rem (7 mm Express) and "work up" loads, knowing the groove size was on the small side for that size bullet. Potentially makes for "issues" related to pilot diameter for the reamer used to do so. That may yet happen - but I wanted a "270" - and to shoot 130 grain bullets - so, being "stubborn" about it, I guess. Oddly, from a previous owner, the stock is well worn - so it has likely been out hunting a fair bit - even though it is not very "accurate", for most purposes.
To my mind, a 270 Win is for longer ranges - wide open Western Prairies shooting - with 130 grain bullets. If I want more bullet weight, is several other rifle cartridges that do so, well. At one extreme, I have 223 Rem, 22-250 and 6.5x55 with a 257 Roberts under construction; at other extreme I have 338 Win Mag, 9.3x62, etc. as well as a 416 Rem Mag under construction. As "very close", is a couple 7x57 and 30-06, as well.
To my mind, a 270 Win is for longer ranges - wide open Western Prairies shooting - with 130 grain bullets. If I want more bullet weight, is several other rifle cartridges that do so, well. At one extreme, I have 223 Rem, 22-250 and 6.5x55 with a 257 Roberts under construction; at other extreme I have 338 Win Mag, 9.3x62, etc. as well as a 416 Rem Mag under construction. As "very close", is a couple 7x57 and 30-06, as well.
Last edited:
I would potentially be interested in a die like this.
CIL did it regularly up to .315 diameter in both loaded ammo and hand loading projectiles. If you wanted larger diameters, in .001 increments, you had to special order a minimum of 1000 projectiles or loaded rounds.
One other thing people aren't taking into account is the jacket materials being used to manufacture the military ball of the day or the thickness of the jackets.
They were thick and relatively hard when compared to ammo of today.
That being said, some 303 Brit chambered rifles with median spec bores will shoot "modern" sporting type flat base bullets, with a .308 diameter bullet well.
Through personal experience and a lovely No4 Mk1 I have with a perfect median bore, I have shot surplus .308 diameter 150 grain projectiles and they groups were terrible from 50yd to 300yd where none of them landed on the paper.
That same rifle will shoot .310 7.62x54R, salvaged projectiles very well out to 300yds, but best with 174 grain Sierra .312 Match boat tails.
One other thing people aren't taking into account is the jacket materials being used to manufacture the military ball of the day or the thickness of the jackets.
They were thick and relatively hard when compared to ammo of today.
That being said, some 303 Brit chambered rifles with median spec bores will shoot "modern" sporting type flat base bullets, with a .308 diameter bullet well.
Through personal experience and a lovely No4 Mk1 I have with a perfect median bore, I have shot surplus .308 diameter 150 grain projectiles and they groups were terrible from 50yd to 300yd where none of them landed on the paper.
That same rifle will shoot .310 7.62x54R, salvaged projectiles very well out to 300yds, but best with 174 grain Sierra .312 Match boat tails.
Last edited:
