Need A Receipe - 30-06 with 220 Grain RN Bullet

When I load 220 grainers in the .30-06, they are usually Hornady. I always use H4831 (exact dose escapes me) and CCI mag primers. They are very accurate and I get good velocity. They penetrate forever and leave big holes in stuff. Sure they aren't as flat shooting as lighter bullets, but they are great from any angle.
 
NEVER just take load data from any source, load up the maximum and go to the range. As hometownhero has already posted, one must work up a load. Using safe practices, and standard loading techniques for the particular rifle the ammo is to be shot in, is always a must.

I was at the range this week and watched as a fellow smoked one primer and then blew another. "Well, that load is in the book!"

As well, the 4831 Jack O'Connor wrote about was surplus 20 mm Oerlikon aircraft cannon powder, repackaged and sold by Hodgdon. It was measurably slower than any of the 4831s we have today.

He did the same with the 270 Win, the load being 62 gr. I shots thousands of rounds using that load in several 270s with no problem. Many guys just dipped the case into a bowl or bucket and filled it to the brim, then seated the bullet. I never used that technique, but know several who did.

Like 4831 posted, "Reloading used to be so simple." :)

Ted
 
I wondered how much say "H4831" powder had changed, progressed, morphed over the past 30-40 years and you answered that question. I need to give it some thought as to how much over the max. suggested I would like to go.....or just go back to success in loading 168 and 180 grain loads.

I really would like to get a 220 grain shooting with some reasonable accuracy, but at what price in terms of wear and tear on the barrel and components.
 
Ted, I don't like to question you on this, but I have done a fair bit of testing with H4831 powder's and my findings are that the old war surplus was a bit faster than the new H4831.
I cut my teeth on the old war surplus type, buying it in 50 pound kegs for considerably less money than one pound of the new, costs today. I still have some of the original war surplus variety that came in a 50 pound keg and I have loaded it in two different calibres within the last couple of months, and there seems to be no change in the powder.
I once had access to an Oehler 33 chronograph and here are some results of the powder. The following test was made on Feb. 11, 1992.
A Husqvarna 30-06 with Speer 200 grain bullet.
60 grains of NEW H4831 averaged-- 2511 fps.
60 grains of old surplus H4831 averaged 2584.
61 .. .. .. .. .. 2629.

A Ruger 77 in 243.
100 grain Sierra bullet, 47 grains of surplus H4831, av. 3080 fps.
Nearly identical to 47 grains of norma 205, which averaged 3094.

270 Sako, 24 inch barrel.
150 grain Hornady bullet, 58 grains of was surplus H4831, average 2919 fps.
That is a darn good measurd speed for 150 grain bullet in 270W.

On Aug. 20, 1991, I made the following test, again with the Oehler 33.
Sako 270W.
Five cases loaded with 130 grain Herters bullets and 60 grains of old war surplus H4831.
Five similar cases loaded exactly the same, only with new H4831 powder.
The old surplus powder averaged 3078.
The new cannistered H4831 averaged 2960.
I rest my case.
Bruce
 
So Bruce, you're saying whether new or old H4831, the bullet speed is close enough as to make no measurable difference when reloading. That is good to know, and puts back a bit of confidence in me to load up the 30-06 case starting at 58 grains, moving up to 63'ish.

Advice: do I load in 1 grain increments or should I go 0.5 increments to determine if the load is safe?
 
waynewjw said:
So Bruce, you're saying whether new or old H4831, the bullet speed is close enough as to make no measurable difference when reloading. That is good to know, and puts back a bit of confidence in me to load up the 30-06 case starting at 58 grains, moving up to 63'ish.

Advice: do I load in 1 grain increments or should I go 0.5 increments to determine if the load is safe?
Click to expand...

I don't have a document in front of me to prove it, but going from memory, when Hodgdon's started to make new H4831, they stated that their data on the old surplus H4831 could also be used for their new cannistered H4831.
From this, it was plain that the new powder would be safe using the old data, therefore, the new H4831 was at least as slow as the old.
My experiments showed a bit less velocity with the same amount of new H4831.
My postings have been to report what I have done. I do not advise people how they should reload, nor do I advise as to any part of reloading, especially as to how much powder to put in any cartridge.
 
waynewjw said:
In 30-06 and any weight bullet, anyone loading more powder than min/max as per Lyman reloading manual? If yes, how many grains over max? And in what increments did you use to work up to tight groups?

I'm using Lyman & Lee's manuals, anyone have load data for 220 grain bullet from other/newer/older manuals?
Click to expand...

http://www.barnesbullets.com/images/30-06SpringfieldWeb.pdf
http://www.barnesbullets.com/Copper_Manual4/30-06%20Springfield.pdf
 
Although I have many reloading books on hand if you want a lot of reloading data from several older manuals to put on your computer you can check this out.
Reloading thepiratebay.se/torrent/6175275/

Hornady has 220 grain loads for the 30-06 listed.
 
waynewjw said:
In 30-06 and any weight bullet, anyone loading more powder than min/max as per Lyman reloading manual? If yes, how many grains over max? And in what increments did you use to work up to tight groups?

I'm using Lyman & Lee's manuals, anyone have load data for 220 grain bullet from other/newer/older manuals?
Click to expand...

To get loads up like you want them, you will require a chronograph.
Loading books, with the exception of Norma, do not give true velocity figures.
As long as loading books have been written, they have stated that a 30-06 drives a 180 grain bullet at 2700 fps.
I have seen books showing as low as 54 grains of IMR 4350 as giving 2700 fps with 180 grain bullet.
I have never chronographed a load as low as 54 grains of 4350, but 55 grains of 4350 with a 180 grain bullet in a 30-06 gave me an average of 2488 fps!
Remember, the 30-06 cartridge has been out there for over a hundred years. The rifles for them have been made in every country that makes sporting rifles.
The 30-06 has been made in every type action, from strong bolt action, to a skinny little barrel under two shotgun barrels, as a break open "drilling," and every type in between.
The loading companies that make up loads and write manuals have to take all this into consideeration and print loads that should be safe in the weakest of actions out there. Because of this, the 30-06 is loaded to lighter pressures than is a 270 or 308 Winchester, for example.
The velocity of 2700 fps given as maximum for a 30-06, is designed to be in line with these lower pressures.
Therefore, if you have a strong bolt action rifle, get a chronograph and load it up until you at least, reach the levels the cartridge was designed for.
You will soon find that it takes more powder to do so, than is shown in American loading manuals.
 
I can see the value in having a chrono to view the results of the loads, but....what if one doesn't have a chrono, such as I. I'm not so sure I want to spend the $ to get one, and in terms of accuracy, I've developed loads for 22-250, 243 and 270 without a chrono. I played with various loads until I finally achieved the accuracy that I wanted.

Why a 220 grain for the 30-06. I've got my Sako 270 shooting nice tight groups with 150 grain bullets. And I've got acceptable accuracy with 168 and 180 grainers in the 30-06, however, not much of a weight difference between the two bullets, so I thought it would be nice to get some precision from the 220 grain Sierra RN bullets.

At the end of the day, I may have to play with a few more powders and if it doesn't produce good results, well, I tried. Time to focus on fine tuning the precision of one of the two lighter bullets.
 
waynewjw said:
I can see the value in having a chrono to view the results of the loads, but....what if one doesn't have a chrono, such as I. I'm not so sure I want to spend the $ to get one, and in terms of accuracy, I've developed loads for 22-250, 243 and 270 without a chrono. I played with various loads until I finally achieved the accuracy that I wanted.

Why a 220 grain for the 30-06. I've got my Sako 270 shooting nice tight groups with 150 grain bullets. And I've got acceptable accuracy with 168 and 180 grainers in the 30-06, however, not much of a weight difference between the two bullets, so I thought it would be nice to get some precision from the 220 grain Sierra RN bullets.

At the end of the day, I may have to play with a few more powders and if it doesn't produce good results, well, I tried. Time to focus on fine tuning the precision of one of the two lighter bullets.
Click to expand...


Why are you guys trying to get super accurate loads for hunting?
If your 30-06 will group 2 inches at 100 yards, you won't miss a single good hit on big game, because of inaccuracy of your rifle.
All this super accurate hunting rifle talk only came about with the advent of the computer and blogs like the one we're on. It has nothing to do with real world hunting, where most misses are the result of poor control of the rifle.
Let's face the truth. These super tight groups that so many shooters strive so hard to achieve, and maybe helped by the key pad, are for bragging purposes, only.
Now back to your 220 grain bullets in your 30-06.
The best powder that some of us who have experimented with it, has been Norma 205/NMP. The old war surplus H4831 was only a minor amount less fps, but equally accurate. There are other slow powders out there which are in the same catagory, but I can not comment on them because I haven't used them.
The old H4831 has been a long time stand by, one could say benchmark, for 220 grain bullets in a 30-06. A heavy load (here we go again) of H4831 has proven to be almost super accurate, in the 30-06 rifles I know of, that it has been tried in.
 
I gotta agree with you "H" on the accuracy bit. 1" @ 100 yds and it'll drop dead. As I've obtained 1/4" and 3/8" groups with my other calibers, this one has become a challenge.

And free standing and shooting at game, hell I'd be happy if I could repeat what I get on the bench, although not likely. Once game is in sight, between the heart pumping, the breathing and the world spinning, one has to really focus to get accuracy and not maim or wound.

And I am just a bit anal about trying to get a super tight group with the 220's. I've got about 55 bullets left to try achieve that, if I don't, then I don't need to worry about it any more.

I started by reading a post from someone else, I think on this site, about best loads for 30-06, and there were a few posts about 220 grain bullets with H or IMR4831 working, so I felt compelled.
 
H4831, not questioning your results at all, but my experience with the new H4831 when it first appeared was different. I found that 62 gr was a bit too hot in my 270s, rather than slower, so I switched to H450 whch gave similar accuracy and same velocity. I wonder if the early batches were hotter than what Hodgdon finally settled on?

You know, one on my 270s, a Husqvarna, actually digested more than 4000 rounds of 62 gr of that old 4831, and never whimpered.

Those were the days! Like you, we paid 50 cents a pound for that stuff when we bought it in those 50 pound cardboard kegs. I still have one of those around here. Use it for holding my topo maps.

IMR powders in cans cost $2.50/lb back then. :)

waynewjw, you are definitely on the right track. Just carefully work up loads with those Sierras, and you will find what you are looking for.

Ted
 
I just loaded a test batch of 220's for my Ruger 77 in .30-06. I used once fired (trimmed) RP brass, a lee 3.4 dipper of 4064 and a lee Loader. Nice simple and fun. Lee chart says it will be about 2450 fps. I have no way of measuring the speed but I will report back on the accuracy. If it shoots around 2" that's more than good enough for my part of the country.

Darryl
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom