Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Jack O'Connor's Pet Loads

Some of you older guys will remember Jack. I always respected his no nonsense, straight forward, based on real experience opinions.

Recently, I read through several of his old writings and came across some of his pet loads for the 30-06 which according to my reloading manuals are considerably "hotter" than their max loads.

Examples;
150 grain bullet-55 grains of 4320
180 grain bullet-50 grains of 4064.... I quote-"velocity in a 22-inch barrel is about 2,700"..."I have a somewhat remodeled Winchester Model 70 "Mannlicher" with a 19-inch barrel. Much to my surprise this load turns up a velocity of 2,630 in the short barrel. No. 4064 gives no great muzzle flash and a fairly light report. It is much more pleasant in a short barrel than slow-burning powder."
220 grain bullet-54 grains 4350 (doesn't mention whether IMR or H)

For the .270, in "the most remarkable rifle I ever had" (a M70 Featherweight, remodeled by Alvin Biesen)
62 grains of H4831 and the 130 grain Nosler...quote- " the velocity averages 3,140 in the 22-inch barrel. If I am having a good day, let the barrel cool a bit between shots, and take pains to hold the rifle the same for each shot, it will keep five shots in an inch or slightly over"....

Now O'Connor was the practical sort and I get the impression there was no BS in his writings...I am tempted to try these loads in some bolt guns but don't know if the properties of these smokeless powders have change significantly over the years....any opinions/advice would be appreciated.

H-4831 that Jack used was surplus power that ran out years ago. The new manufactured H-4831 is but in burn rate but not exactly the same.
The 4350 That O’Conner used was IMR, the only one availabile at the time.

T M -

First and most importantly --- the 62 gr charge of "H" 4831 was NOT the powder we have today. That was "military" Surplus powder and that supply sold out @ 1970. That date is NOT exact. In the older loading manuals there was NO H designation, it was simply 4831.

That said, There have been diff manufacturers of H 4831 for Hodgdon SO it's definitely NOT the same powder.
I would NOT automatically load that max charge. AS ALWAYS start lower and work up. I would not be surprised to find '60' grs to be closer to max with today's powder (H 4831).

Another of JOC's pet loads was 52 1/2 hrs. IMR 4064 for 150 gr bullets ( 30-06 ) I have used that load over the years with complete success. The velocity is +/- 2900 fps and very good accuracy.

Your mention of "220 gr. bullets & 4350 (doesn't mention whether IMR or H )" >>>> then there was NO H 4350. It definitely was IMR 4350.

Another of his favorite cartridges is the 7X57. Since I've had 270s, I never traveled the road LESS traveled.
So I don't have any suggestions for that.

There are many other loaders out there and I'm sure they'll have things to add to help you.

Good Luck

Jerry

Mornin JWP. Hope all is well with you & yours.

Jerry

After I got my 270 back in the late 70's, I read an O'Connor article where he gave 60 grains of H4831 as his load for the 270 with 130 grain bullets. That's where I started out, and what I still use today.

By the way, I remember an article on the 7X57 by Jim Carmichael where he gave his favorite load for it. It was 51 grains of IMR4350 with a 140 grain bullet. That is way more powder than the manuals show today. Those guys must have believed in living dangerously. But, I have loaded and shot Carmichael's load in my 7X57, and it didn't show any signs of pressure.

I used 49.5 4064 130 grain I think this also was one of his pet loads

Morning! Hope all is well with you and yours as well

I suspect that todays 7828 is nearly identical with the 4831 that O"Connor used in his 270. It does work very well.
That said, I have used H4831, and continue to use kegs of H4831SC, under a 130gr Partiton, at 60-62 grains in my 270's.

That load, with Remington brass and a Federal 210 primer, gives me 3100 FPS out of the 22" barrel of my Ottmar stocked .270, as measured by my LabRadar.

Happily it is wonderfully accurate as well.

Always use data current for the powder you have, and always work up.

I've got a few odds and ends of older powder, and some older manuals from the same time frame. I might use the powder up for practice loads, using the old data, but I'll keep the charges modest. Or, since I don't have a whole bunch, I might just pour it on my grass.

I have a few pounds of vintage H-4831; it came in paper bags back in the '60's.

When the paper bags started breaking down, I transfered the powder to empty powder containers, appropriately labeled with a Magic Marker.

It smells good, no brown dust, shoots great. I think it may be a tad slower than current H-4831.

DF

I love to play around with other cartridges, and in doing so, I have sadly neglected my 270. I have a ton of powder, brass, and bullets for my reloading purposes. To be honest about it, I could get rid of most all of it, except for a few pounds of H4831, a few boxes of 130 grain bullets, and never look back. JOC was right about the 270. It will do everything I need a centerfire cartridge to do.

We all need to take into account that the recommended loading data for old military cartridges typically has a lower pressure ceiling due to the wide range of quality of materials and workmanship found in old military rifles and, in some cases, because of the strength/design of the actions. A load that is safe 24/7/365 in a commercial bolt action might be a potential bomb in an old military rifle due to design flaws, questionable metallurgy of some rifles that were made under sub-optimal war time conditions, or in rifles that were poorly maintained.

I'm thinking in terms of a hot 7x57 load fired from a Remington rolling block or an equally hot 6.5x55 load fired from a Norwegian Krag.

A solid 60K psi, sometimes a tad over, was a big boon for the .270.

When Rem rolled out their .280, they loaded it down for their 742 semi auto, thus it never ran neck and neck with the .270. IMO, just another long list of Rem blunders.

Oh well.

And no one from the Fire was there to tell ole Jack that his fav. round was "gay". Back then, "gay" was still in the closet, hadn't been "outed", wasn't
a code term, just meant what it always had meant, "lighthearted and carefree"...

DF

I agree with you. I neglected the 270 because it was too common, too easy, and I wanted to do things differently. I was shooting the 256 Newton and 7x57 in lieu of the 270 because they were different and I had to reload in order to maximize those cartridges' potentials while my friends could just shoot factory ammo.

I was reading the book "Letters From Elmer Keith" the other day and EK was, as usual, totally negative toward the 270 as a cartridge for shooting elk. I was amazed by the rude language that he used when writing about JOC and other writers whose views were in conflict with his views.

D F

I have 'almost' 10 lbs of Surplus 4831. It came in a Military Powder Can --IN paper & plastic bag. I'm using it in my 284 Win with great results.

You are correct according to my Oehler - it is a tad slower 'burning' than current H 4831.


Jerry

A few comments on this thread in general:

Actually, O'Connor originally suggested 62.0 grains of H4831 with 130's in the .270, but toned it down to 60.0 in later writings. These days, bullets vary far more in how much pressure they'll produce with the same powder charge, but Hornady's past several manuals (including the present 10th edition, published in 2016) lists 62.0 grains of H4831 as maximum for the .270 with 130's, for 3100 fps from a 24" barrel. However, Hornady bullets don't result in as much pressure as many other brands.

A couple of years ago I tried 61.0 grains of two kinds of H4831 with 130-grain Hornady Spire Points in my 22" barreled Model 70 Featherweight Classic. One was original mil-surp from a can I just opened, which smelled and looked "normal," and the other recent production Hodgdon, made in Australia. The military powder got 3118 fps and the recent powder 3029, indicating the original powder was "hotter." However, that's an example of one batch of each.

Somebody mentioned Jim Carmichel using 51.0 grains of IMR4350 with 140's in the 7x57. Most data for the 7x57 is very low-pressure, though some is a little hotter "for modern rifles," but even then the throat length of 7x57's is all over the place, varying from the original very long throats of military rifles designed to shoot 173-grain roundnoses, and some (not all) modern rifles with much shorter throats. SAAMI's 7x57 throat is much shorter than the original military. This results in a spread of around 3 grains of powder even at the same test-pressure.

Back when O'Connor was experimenting with .270 handloads, the data in many loading manuals was still worked up the same way some handloaders still do today, by looking for "pressure signs," then backing the charge down a little when they appeared. In fact, that's how all the Speer data was worked up into at least the 1960's, even though Vernon Speer had purchased copper-crusher test equipment in the 1950's, apparently because nobody at Speer could figure out how to use the test equipment.

Many pressure signs, such as loose primer pockets and ejector-hole marks on case heads, often don't appear until around 70,000 PSI, which is one reason early published data was often hotter than todays, and the big reason wildcatters often get higher velocities out of cases that don't hold much, if any, more powder than factory rounds. As an example, it's why most 7mm STW handloaders got 3600+ fps with 140-grain bullets when the round was still a wildcat, but after Remington made it a factory round the hottest factory ammo was listed at 3400.

I ended up with Major Charles Askins Sr's personal Superposed, did a good bit of research on the Askins and, of course, JOC and EK were players in that saga. It seems that the Major helped get EK started as a gun writer, they were close, lifelong friends.

Col. Askins, the Major's devoted son, hated JOC. The Major was one of the preeminant gun writers, reportedly the highest paid of that era. As he aged, he started showing signs of dementia, actually died in the Waco VA, which I found out is a psych type facility consistent with treating dementia patients.

It is rumored that the Col helped his Dad with some of his later articles and work. It's also rumored that JOC found out, blew the whistle, ended up with the Major's job. The Col, not the forgiving type to begin with, never forgave JOC. There was ongoing bad blood for his remaining years.

If the Askins, especially the Col, hated JOC, EK as a close Askins ally would tend to have taken their side. Plus, EK didn't like "pest guns" for BG. I think the development of modern bullets nullify a lot of EK's observations and conclusions.

Although their ages weren't that different, EK and JOC seemed to be from different eras, JOC moving into the modern firearm era, EK sticking with the old ways, with what had worked for him. I guess in a way, both were right.

Interesting stuff, a collection of fact and rumor left for us to sort out.

DF

JOC was an educated man, earning both bachelors and masters degrees before WW2, when very few people had the opportunity to earn either degree or any degree at all.

EK was much the opposite and if you read between the lines, he seems jealous of JOC's opportunities and success. In any case, there seemed to be a lot of petty BS. That said, the book that I was reading is a compilation of private letters written by EK and it is probable that when he wrote them, he never expected or intended for them to be published and made public.

Possibly not meant for widespread publicatioin...

I can appreciate that.

Elmer, however, never seemed bashful when it came to expressing himself....

DF