I'm fairly new at reloading, having done only straight-wall pistol cartridges with mild loads on a single-stage press so far. I bought the press so I could afford to shoot my .44 Magnum, and I figured it would also work well for loading hunting and precision rifle ammo. This past weekend, I needed to go tinker with the roll crimp for my .38 Special recipe, and I figured what the heck, now that I've fired a few boxes of the Prvi factory ammo, I'll use the empty cases and dial in an initial batch of 9.3x62mm as well.
One thing I've discovered about reloading is that the ammo drought has extended to reloading components as well. I've got cases and projectiles, and was able to scrounge up 1000 WLRM primers, but powder is hard to find, especially locally. That's important, because when working up a load, I don't want to buy 8 lbs of a powder I might not end up using, and the combined hazmat and shipping fees are more than most 1lbs cans of powder cost. At those prices, I might as well just buy factory ammo. So after striking out on more common powders like Varget and RL15, and reading some various forum posts about people using it for the 9.3, I was rather happy when I found a single pound of Ramshot Big Game in a local store and forked over my money.
Now, as I mentioned, I'm new at reloading, and I don't consider myself anywhere near the level of experience to start going off into the weeds on load recipes. As I gain more experience, I might start doing some experimentation, but for now I stick to the book religiously, including component selection, measurements, etc. So imagine my surprise when I can't find any published data that uses Big Game in the 9.3 (Hornady lists TAC, and Barnes doesn't list any Ramshot powders for this cartridge), and only a few mentions of using Big Game specifically with Prvi cases and bullets (note: I don't plan to take Prvi bullets to Africa, but I do intend to use them for familiarization shooting, learning the initial ins and outs of reloading bottleneck rifle cartridges, and likely some whitetail hunting without breaking the bank on premium bullets. For the actual safari, I will be loading up the tried-and-true Barnes TTSX and either Barnes or Hornady solids.) My 'economy load' for practice and familiarization won't pan out if I can't find load data for it. So, off to the internet I go. And lo and behold, I found www.realguns.com had some data for Big Game with Prvi bullets. Awesome.
And so after I set up the RCBS neck sizing die and resize/measure the first sacrificial case, it's time to dial in the seating die. I'm hopeful that I can get everything zeroed in and start loading my initial batch. And before I seat a round, I take a look at the printout of the load data and I notice a little asterisk next to the COL data for the Prvi bullets. The data for this particular load has a COL of 3.305", 0.014" longer than the maximum COL in every factory book I've read (3.291"), and 0.030" longer than the COL of my factory Prvi ammo (3.275"). Spider sense... tingling. At this point, I put the dies away and go back to Google. Eventually I found someone using that particular recipe in a Ruger African with no issues, though he did back down the rather heavy powder charge and used non-magnum WLR primers. So, I emailed the Ramshot people to ask if they had any recipes for Big Game with Prvi bullets, but they don't.
So, for any of you more experienced reloaders out there, what would you suggest? Pick the data for a similar bullet, seat to normal COL, and start with a lower charge and work up? Keep looking for data for the exact components that I have?
Showing posts with label bullets. Show all posts
Showing posts with label bullets. Show all posts
Friday, February 21, 2014
Wednesday, February 19, 2014
Calibers Pt. II
As promised, here's the next installment of caliber selection for my safari. As mentioned earlier, I'm not going to be hunting any of the Big Five, so I won't need any of the .400-caliber or larger rounds. But I do plan to at least try for a kudu and/or eland, and that's pushing the capability of even the best bullets in a .30-'06 or .308 Winchester. So what should I use for a 'medium' safari rifle?
The gold standard is the classic .375 Holland & Holland Magnum. It's the standard for good reason: it's got manageable recoil, a reasonably flat trajectory, great bullet selection, and enough power to take on just about anything on the continent under reasonable conditions. I wouldn't want to stop a charging elephant with one, but that's not my concern. If by some stroke of Murphy I'm charged by an elephant, well, my PH will have a .460 Weatherby in his Johnny Benchian hands. It's also readily available in Africa if your ammo somehow doesn't make the rendezvous.
But is the .375 truly the best choice for me, even amongst calibers with historical appeal? Let's look at some of the downsides. First of all, there's the cost. I'm not a rich man by any stretch, and safaris are getting more expensive every day. I would rather buy a more economical (note: not necessarily 'cheap') rifle and save my money for trophy fees and practice ammo. And one of the major fixed costs of the .375 H&H is the fact that it requires a magnum action. That adds $300 or so to the cost of the rifle, easily. That may not be a whole lot in terms of trophy fees, but it's a fair amount of reloading components that I could use to become more proficient with the weapon. And while .375 H&H ammo is cheap compared to the truly big bores, it's still not exactly low-cost for training.
Despite all this, until recently I saw no truly better alternative, and resigned myself to saving up my pennies to buy a .375 H&H. And then I heard about Otto Bock's creation: the 9.3x62mm. On paper, it doesn't look like much, appearing to be the Continental equivalent of a .35 Whelen. It pushes a .366-caliber 286gr slug at a rather sedate 2350 fps (or 2250fps for some loads), compared to the .375's 300gr projectile @ 2650 or so. So again, on paper, the .375 wins hands down. But the 9.3 had a sterling reputation in the early decades of the 20th Century. In fact, the .375 was created by Holland & Holland to supplant it, and there had to be a reason for this. Several African nations require a minimum of .375 to hunt dangerous game, and several of those nations have an exception to allow the 9.3x62mm. The commonly heard phrase is "It kills out of proportion to its size and recoil." It just seems to have that magic formula of sectional density, good bullet construction and moderate velocity that lets it penetrate deeper than you'd expect from such a relatively mild cartridge. And it just so happens that the 9.3x62mm fits into standard-length actions, with the same magazine capacity as a .30-'06.
Another explanation for the on-paper performance gap is that the .375 has benefited from years of handloading experience and development, something the mostly-forgotten 9.3mm lacked until relatively recently. In the last 10 years or so, there has been a resurgence of interest in the 9.3x62mm (and its near-twin for double rifles, the 9.3x74mmR), and the major makers (including Barnes, Hornady, Speer and Swift, as well as European makers like Norma, Prvi Partizan and Lapua) have started producing premium bullets and testing out new powders to bring out the cartridge's potential. Factory ammo (and reloading manuals) keep the velocity low for much the same reason as they do with the .45-70: there are plenty of older rifles that can't handle the pressures of a modern high-performance cartridge. Several companies chambered older-model (pre-98) Mauser actions in 9.3x62, and these don't have the strength or the safety features of the later guns. In a modern action with modern powders, you can push things a little further.
I heard about the 9.3x62 from my father, who was turned on to the cartridge by Bill Wilson of Wilson Combat fame. Bill's been hunting in Africa for decades, and learned of the cartridge from some friends there. He's become a big fan, so much so that he wrote the introduction for the 9.3x62mm section in the Barnes reloading manual. My father fired Bill's rifle and fell in love with the manageable recoil, higher magazine capacity, faster follow-up shots, and smooth feeding. He loved it so much, he took a 9.3 of his own to Africa for his latest safari, taking everything from Steinbok to Cape buffalo with it using Hornady DGS solids and 286gr Barnes TTSX .
Only a few years ago, your options for a factory rifle in this caliber, available in the US, were pretty much limited to CZ and Sako (the Scandinavians apparently love this cartridge for hunting moose and bear). The CZ is fairly reasonable in price, and the Sako isn't particularly bad, but still hovering around the $1000 mark. The CZ also wasn't available in an 'African' pattern. And then came Ruger. Ruger created their own .375 Ruger cartridge to duplicate .375 H&H ballistics in a standard-length action, but it came at the expense of magazine capacity due to the fatter cartridge casing required to hold all that powder. So when Ruger offered their Hawkeye African rifle in 9.3x62mm with a 4+1 capacity, both Dad and I jumped on it. And a good thing we did; Ruger discontinued the rifle in that chambering within a year or two. Perhaps they wanted to boost sales of their proprietary .375 and .416 cartridges, I don't know. But whatever the reason, we were lucky enough to get a pair. I immediately ordered a set of Warne quick-detach rings, an SWFA 1-6x optic, and some Prvi Partizan 285gr softpoints for practice fodder/donor cases. Once I got everything set up, it was off to the range to zero.
And that... is another story.
The gold standard is the classic .375 Holland & Holland Magnum. It's the standard for good reason: it's got manageable recoil, a reasonably flat trajectory, great bullet selection, and enough power to take on just about anything on the continent under reasonable conditions. I wouldn't want to stop a charging elephant with one, but that's not my concern. If by some stroke of Murphy I'm charged by an elephant, well, my PH will have a .460 Weatherby in his Johnny Benchian hands. It's also readily available in Africa if your ammo somehow doesn't make the rendezvous.
But is the .375 truly the best choice for me, even amongst calibers with historical appeal? Let's look at some of the downsides. First of all, there's the cost. I'm not a rich man by any stretch, and safaris are getting more expensive every day. I would rather buy a more economical (note: not necessarily 'cheap') rifle and save my money for trophy fees and practice ammo. And one of the major fixed costs of the .375 H&H is the fact that it requires a magnum action. That adds $300 or so to the cost of the rifle, easily. That may not be a whole lot in terms of trophy fees, but it's a fair amount of reloading components that I could use to become more proficient with the weapon. And while .375 H&H ammo is cheap compared to the truly big bores, it's still not exactly low-cost for training.
Despite all this, until recently I saw no truly better alternative, and resigned myself to saving up my pennies to buy a .375 H&H. And then I heard about Otto Bock's creation: the 9.3x62mm. On paper, it doesn't look like much, appearing to be the Continental equivalent of a .35 Whelen. It pushes a .366-caliber 286gr slug at a rather sedate 2350 fps (or 2250fps for some loads), compared to the .375's 300gr projectile @ 2650 or so. So again, on paper, the .375 wins hands down. But the 9.3 had a sterling reputation in the early decades of the 20th Century. In fact, the .375 was created by Holland & Holland to supplant it, and there had to be a reason for this. Several African nations require a minimum of .375 to hunt dangerous game, and several of those nations have an exception to allow the 9.3x62mm. The commonly heard phrase is "It kills out of proportion to its size and recoil." It just seems to have that magic formula of sectional density, good bullet construction and moderate velocity that lets it penetrate deeper than you'd expect from such a relatively mild cartridge. And it just so happens that the 9.3x62mm fits into standard-length actions, with the same magazine capacity as a .30-'06.
Another explanation for the on-paper performance gap is that the .375 has benefited from years of handloading experience and development, something the mostly-forgotten 9.3mm lacked until relatively recently. In the last 10 years or so, there has been a resurgence of interest in the 9.3x62mm (and its near-twin for double rifles, the 9.3x74mmR), and the major makers (including Barnes, Hornady, Speer and Swift, as well as European makers like Norma, Prvi Partizan and Lapua) have started producing premium bullets and testing out new powders to bring out the cartridge's potential. Factory ammo (and reloading manuals) keep the velocity low for much the same reason as they do with the .45-70: there are plenty of older rifles that can't handle the pressures of a modern high-performance cartridge. Several companies chambered older-model (pre-98) Mauser actions in 9.3x62, and these don't have the strength or the safety features of the later guns. In a modern action with modern powders, you can push things a little further.
I heard about the 9.3x62 from my father, who was turned on to the cartridge by Bill Wilson of Wilson Combat fame. Bill's been hunting in Africa for decades, and learned of the cartridge from some friends there. He's become a big fan, so much so that he wrote the introduction for the 9.3x62mm section in the Barnes reloading manual. My father fired Bill's rifle and fell in love with the manageable recoil, higher magazine capacity, faster follow-up shots, and smooth feeding. He loved it so much, he took a 9.3 of his own to Africa for his latest safari, taking everything from Steinbok to Cape buffalo with it using Hornady DGS solids and 286gr Barnes TTSX .
Only a few years ago, your options for a factory rifle in this caliber, available in the US, were pretty much limited to CZ and Sako (the Scandinavians apparently love this cartridge for hunting moose and bear). The CZ is fairly reasonable in price, and the Sako isn't particularly bad, but still hovering around the $1000 mark. The CZ also wasn't available in an 'African' pattern. And then came Ruger. Ruger created their own .375 Ruger cartridge to duplicate .375 H&H ballistics in a standard-length action, but it came at the expense of magazine capacity due to the fatter cartridge casing required to hold all that powder. So when Ruger offered their Hawkeye African rifle in 9.3x62mm with a 4+1 capacity, both Dad and I jumped on it. And a good thing we did; Ruger discontinued the rifle in that chambering within a year or two. Perhaps they wanted to boost sales of their proprietary .375 and .416 cartridges, I don't know. But whatever the reason, we were lucky enough to get a pair. I immediately ordered a set of Warne quick-detach rings, an SWFA 1-6x optic, and some Prvi Partizan 285gr softpoints for practice fodder/donor cases. Once I got everything set up, it was off to the range to zero.
And that... is another story.
Tuesday, February 18, 2014
Today's subject: calibers.
I'm a gun guy. I love guns. I love shooting guns. I love reading about guns. I memorize gun facts like Ken Jennings on Jeopardy. Thus, it may come as a shocker that I'm doing the first real post about *gasp* calibers.
There are a ton of classic calibers for African hunting. Theodore Roosevelt took a .30-'03 (yes, you read that right) and a .405 Winchester, among others. The .375 H&H Magnum has a well deserved reputation as an all-around African cartridge, capable of (if not exactly perfect for) taking any critter on the continent (and, probably, the land surface of the Earth). The big Nitro Express double rifle cartridges have a cachet all their own, and have been making a big comeback after decades of decline.
Choosing a caliber for your African safari is a matter of logic in many ways: what game do I plan to hunt? In what kind of terrain will I be hunting? What kind of rifle (double, bolt action, single shot, lever action) do I use? Do I even use a rifle, or do I use a handgun (revolver, single-shot)? Is the cartridge readily available in gun shops or stores, or is it a handloading-only proposition? These questions will narrow down your choices.
But safaris aren't exclusively practical. There's definitely something to be said for the cachet of history. For me, a big part of the excitement of going on safari is walking in places where giants have walked previously, and I hear the call of the old calibers strongly. So how does one balance the two?
First thing's first: game and terrain. I plan to hunt in South Africa along the Limpopo river, where there is moderate to heavy thornbush. Most shots will be 100 yards or less, and a 200 yard shot is about the longest I can reasonably expect. So I don't need a super-flat-shooting wunderpatron. That's good, because those new supercartridges tend to be hard-kicking, barrel-eating, wallet-raping bastards. Whatever I pick can have reasonable velocities and good versatility.
I plan to hunt plains game, from the tiny Steinbok up to the kudu and possibly eland, but mostly things like gemsbok, warthog, impala and wildebeest. Most of these are deer-sized, so I can use a deer rifle. The bigger critters like eland, kudu and wildebeest (and possibly zebra) might call for a bigger gun with a bit more oomph. So, I'm looking at taking two rifles. I want a 'light' (what most hunters in the US would generally term a 'medium' rifle, or full-power deer rifle) and a 'medium' (which most hunters in the US would term an 'elephant gun', even though I'll not shoot any elephants or even buffalo on this first trip). There are a lot of modern, high-performance cartridges in both categories, but let's start with the 'light' rifle.
The first cartridge I looked at was the 7x57mm Mauser. It's got a long history of use in Africa, it's got decent bullet selection, and it can be had in light and handy rifles. But to my mind, it's a bit light for most of the larger plains game, and I want something that I can use in a pinch on most anything I see (within reason). Plus, it's hard to find in an inexpensive, US-made rifle. So, that's out for now.
The next cartridge I looked at was the .318 Westley Richards. This is a classic cartridge, but one I don't see very often anymore. Turns out almost nobody makes it. Westley Richards will build you a new bolt-gun in this caliber, but you'll pay out the nose for it. So that's out too, along with the .300 H&H Magnum for the same reasons.
The more I looked, the more I saw similar issues with just about every 'light' cartridge with any significant historical cachet. And then it hit me: there is one classic American hunting cartridge that has a long history of use in Africa: the venerable .30-'06 Springfield. It's always been a versatile, excellent cartridge with decent trajectory and a plethora of bullet options, but with the newer powders and advanced bullet designs, it's become even better. For what I need, I figure a passel of 168gr Barnes TTSX handloads will do nicely. I've used this bullet in my .308 for whitetail, and it's incredible. It blows my old 150gr Nosler BTs out of the water. The BTs would occasionally fail to expand when they hit bone, and didn't do well in the brushy country where I hunt back in West Virginia. The Barnes bullet is just amazing. It blows through bone, tissue, and hide like it wasn't there. It's the perfect bullet for deep penetration with good expansion.
So that's settled, now what rifle? There are a ton of .30-'06 rifles on the market, it's just about the universal deer caliber and every maker produces one. I'd like a bolt-action, because of the intrinsic strength and accuracy of the design, and my familiarity with it from years of deer hunting. But do I go for a Remington? Winchester? Ruger? CZ? Custom? I've already got a Ruger bolt-action in a larger caliber (which I'll touch on in the next segment), and I've used a Remington Model 7 in .308 for years on whitetail. This is something I'm still trying to decide, and I may not choose for some time. But in any event, I've got a set of reloading dies so that I can start working up loads as soon as I get a rifle. And if worst comes to worst, I'll take that little Model 7 and I'm sure it'll do just fine.
There are a ton of classic calibers for African hunting. Theodore Roosevelt took a .30-'03 (yes, you read that right) and a .405 Winchester, among others. The .375 H&H Magnum has a well deserved reputation as an all-around African cartridge, capable of (if not exactly perfect for) taking any critter on the continent (and, probably, the land surface of the Earth). The big Nitro Express double rifle cartridges have a cachet all their own, and have been making a big comeback after decades of decline.
Choosing a caliber for your African safari is a matter of logic in many ways: what game do I plan to hunt? In what kind of terrain will I be hunting? What kind of rifle (double, bolt action, single shot, lever action) do I use? Do I even use a rifle, or do I use a handgun (revolver, single-shot)? Is the cartridge readily available in gun shops or stores, or is it a handloading-only proposition? These questions will narrow down your choices.
But safaris aren't exclusively practical. There's definitely something to be said for the cachet of history. For me, a big part of the excitement of going on safari is walking in places where giants have walked previously, and I hear the call of the old calibers strongly. So how does one balance the two?
First thing's first: game and terrain. I plan to hunt in South Africa along the Limpopo river, where there is moderate to heavy thornbush. Most shots will be 100 yards or less, and a 200 yard shot is about the longest I can reasonably expect. So I don't need a super-flat-shooting wunderpatron. That's good, because those new supercartridges tend to be hard-kicking, barrel-eating, wallet-raping bastards. Whatever I pick can have reasonable velocities and good versatility.
I plan to hunt plains game, from the tiny Steinbok up to the kudu and possibly eland, but mostly things like gemsbok, warthog, impala and wildebeest. Most of these are deer-sized, so I can use a deer rifle. The bigger critters like eland, kudu and wildebeest (and possibly zebra) might call for a bigger gun with a bit more oomph. So, I'm looking at taking two rifles. I want a 'light' (what most hunters in the US would generally term a 'medium' rifle, or full-power deer rifle) and a 'medium' (which most hunters in the US would term an 'elephant gun', even though I'll not shoot any elephants or even buffalo on this first trip). There are a lot of modern, high-performance cartridges in both categories, but let's start with the 'light' rifle.
The first cartridge I looked at was the 7x57mm Mauser. It's got a long history of use in Africa, it's got decent bullet selection, and it can be had in light and handy rifles. But to my mind, it's a bit light for most of the larger plains game, and I want something that I can use in a pinch on most anything I see (within reason). Plus, it's hard to find in an inexpensive, US-made rifle. So, that's out for now.
The next cartridge I looked at was the .318 Westley Richards. This is a classic cartridge, but one I don't see very often anymore. Turns out almost nobody makes it. Westley Richards will build you a new bolt-gun in this caliber, but you'll pay out the nose for it. So that's out too, along with the .300 H&H Magnum for the same reasons.
The more I looked, the more I saw similar issues with just about every 'light' cartridge with any significant historical cachet. And then it hit me: there is one classic American hunting cartridge that has a long history of use in Africa: the venerable .30-'06 Springfield. It's always been a versatile, excellent cartridge with decent trajectory and a plethora of bullet options, but with the newer powders and advanced bullet designs, it's become even better. For what I need, I figure a passel of 168gr Barnes TTSX handloads will do nicely. I've used this bullet in my .308 for whitetail, and it's incredible. It blows my old 150gr Nosler BTs out of the water. The BTs would occasionally fail to expand when they hit bone, and didn't do well in the brushy country where I hunt back in West Virginia. The Barnes bullet is just amazing. It blows through bone, tissue, and hide like it wasn't there. It's the perfect bullet for deep penetration with good expansion.
So that's settled, now what rifle? There are a ton of .30-'06 rifles on the market, it's just about the universal deer caliber and every maker produces one. I'd like a bolt-action, because of the intrinsic strength and accuracy of the design, and my familiarity with it from years of deer hunting. But do I go for a Remington? Winchester? Ruger? CZ? Custom? I've already got a Ruger bolt-action in a larger caliber (which I'll touch on in the next segment), and I've used a Remington Model 7 in .308 for years on whitetail. This is something I'm still trying to decide, and I may not choose for some time. But in any event, I've got a set of reloading dies so that I can start working up loads as soon as I get a rifle. And if worst comes to worst, I'll take that little Model 7 and I'm sure it'll do just fine.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)