Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Savage Collectors 190gr bullets

Thanks for the reply. No doubt even apparently identical rifles and the same loads can produce very different velocities. I think my 190 Hawk loads at 1850 will be a good deer load. A quick ballistics check shows 1" high @ 25 yards will hit 2" low at 150 yards with 1000 foot pounds of energy. @ 100 yards the bullet is about 1" high. Pretty flat shooting load for what it is. Well my older eyes and my Lyman receiver sight are OK to about 125 under perfect conditions. I am looking forward to your report on the Barnes bullets. They are a lot cheaper up here than the Hawks by far. I have to admit they LOOK good hopefully they perform as well as they look.

I wouldn't turn my nose up at any flavor 190 moving out at 1850 fps. Look at it this way: the old standard .30-40 Krag round that has been getting critter's attention for 120+ years has been and always will be the 220 grain bullet at 2000 fps, forever and ever, amen. (And then only 18-1900 fps out of the Carbine version.) Our 190's at 2000 fps are only 30 grains less bullet weight. Think about it.

Wait'll y'all see what's gonna happen with a 210 grain RN cast bullet. Coming to a theater near you soon. (Hint: an old mentor of mine loaded his deer/bear .30-30's with the Lyman 311284 220 grain RN cast bullet over a case full of either H4831 or 4350 and left a trail of dead bodies of both species up and down the Virginia Blue Ridge. Frank Marshall was his name and he made many a convert in the Cast Bullet Association back in the 70's-80's with that load, fired out of, drum roll.......... a Savage 340. That man had more common sense in his little finger than anyone I knew. What a character.) I have meant to replicate his findings on my own, I'm finally finding the time and resources to do it.

150's, 170's, 180's, 190's, 210's. Any way you cut it, there's venison in the freezer when a guy pokes a .303 at a deer. Period. It's just fun experimenting and drawing one's own conclusions is all.

That deer is a TOAD.


WOWZA!

Just got back from range with a 1929 model F--190 gr Barnes with both IMR 4064 and Varget. Also a 170 Sierra with IMR4064. Ran the 190s with 27,28,29 gr IMR 4064 and 28,29,30 gr of Varget. The Sierras with 30.5 gr IMR4064. POLLEN HERE HORRIBLE! All will fall out of chamber. 3/4" groups close in with 170s and the Varget 190's. No chrony. Sneezin so bad I left before I stretched it out. Will measure out case expansions and further evaluate. Believe my chamber a little rough. Even with the 150's from Graf & S, I have a slight amount of primer protrusion. Only With the 30 gr charge of Varget did the base become totally smooth. Edges of primer still rounded though.

How "close in"?

Case expansion and primer flattening are terrible means to gauge pressure, Ken Waters notwithstanding. Ask John Barsness. It sounds like you're shooting some pretty sane loads regardless. I gotta try some .303's loaded with 190 Barnes, but other experiments keep pushing them onto the back burner. Interested in following your progress!

I'm thinking a caseful of 4831 just might be the shizzle with those 190 jacketeds.

I ran into a guy at the range last year who wore a face mask to limit pollen intake. He claimed it helped. Luckily I've never been bothered by it, knock on wood.

During the rain yesterday, I had time to evaluate the fired cases. SOME LARGE SURPRISES RESULT!! Both Lyman #46 and Lee 2nd edition show headspace measurement 2B 1.418 in from the head to a datum line of 0.375 in dia. Using a hornady headspace comparator kit and a Lyman stainless 6 in caliper, I found the following: The unfired Graf by Hornady 150 gr RN measured 1.405 to fired 1.414 with a primer protrusion of 0.006. My hand load of 170 gr Sierra RN with 30.5 gr IMR4064 went unfired1.404 to fired 1.416 with a primer protrusion of 0.005. My handload of 190 gr FN Barnes with 29 gr of IMR 4064 went 1.404 to fired 1.417 with primer protrusion of 0.004. My handload of 190 gr Barnes with 30 gr of Varget went 1.405 to fired 1.418 with primer protrusion of 0.004. Just as a comparison, 20 rds of vintage Remington 180 gr RN unfired went 1.395 avg with variance of +4 to -8 for 19 rounds. #20 measured 1.422 unfired and triple checked. Previously, I had observed the water capacity of a fired, but resized, Graf's ammo case to be 42.7 grs and that of a resized Win 30-30 case to be 44.1 gr. These closely paralleled a posting here by Mule Deer some years back of an experiment he had ran. I remembered reading about his results in the pages of Handloader years ago but could not find it in my stockpiled copies so I called them and purchased a reprint of #238 from Dec of 2005. My technique was NOT the same as his. I had weighed a resized case with a primer filled to the brim. He used a fired case with a 170 gr Speer inserted to the cannelure. In evaluating the 3 cases from the 30 gr Varget loading, I found the following: Weight of unsized, fired PPU case-171.63 gr. Weight of same case filled to brim with a Sierra FN 170 gr inserted to cannelure and then exterior well wiped with a paper towel-208.08 gr or water weight of 35.45 gr. This is a reduction of 11.74 % vs what MD found. Repeating these steps with the 190 Barnes FN yielded a water capacity of 34.84 gr or a reduction of 15.64%. Now MD utilized a Speer which in 2005 would have been a Hot-cor. All I had on the shelf was a deep curl. I didn't repeat the weighing with it but did observe the bullet to be longer than the Sierra and the cannelure further from the base, almost as far a the cannelure on the 190 Barnes. This would yield even a greater reductionof water capacity inthe PPU brass. MD used a Win case from a 190 ST loading.

Your mileage may vary as these measurements were taken from firings in my rifle and with my caliper. That PPU 303 Savage brass runs from 20-30 grains heavier than win 30-30 brass and is very strong but does offer less capacity. Think I wont Tiptoe any further than these loads in my Tulip patch. I suggest you develop your own loads and don't use these. The lot # of the PPU brass is 1701 and was purchased from both Graf and Midway usa. I've polished the chamber a little with some JB bore paste using a case as a lap. Well C if that helps.

It's way too early in the morning to digest that but thanks for posting.

Stop pushing the shoulder back when you size and you will have zero protrusion...lightly oil new brass so it doesn't adhere to the chamber,then size without touching the shoulder.....A little tip from P.O. Ackley.....end of story

Brass was sized with sizing die about the width of a nickle above the shell holder--Shoulder never touched. Factory brass as evidenced both in my handloads and the factory loads of Graf's ammo loaded by hornady comes with a really short headspace. When resizing this brass discussed above, I will raise the die even further, trim to length, and see if it will chamber. As the dia is reduced there will be a growth in headspace measurement. I'm curious as to how long this chamber is to the neck. Once the brass reached the point where it won't chamber, then I will begin to lightly kiss the neck and work the shoulder back .002-.004 in. The factory length of headspace was not altered in loading and this was the first loading of this brass. I feel like hornady did the same . Chamber had residual Rem oil certainly present when the firing of the Graf's ammo took place, as they were fired 1st. in this series. Thanks for the tip but it just don't apply.

This, plus headspace is determined by the rim of the case and its relationship with the bolt face, as with all rimmed cartridges. This data, while interesting and appreciated merely proves the sloppiness (or lack thereof) of the rifle's chamber. Sloppy headspace can be corrected by switching the dynamic from rim-based to shoulder fit (as with a rimless case), but that is achieved after the first firing and then not touching the shoulder with the sizer die like sqweeler said. The alternative, with new brass, is to expand the neck to a larger diameter and then re-sizing to proper diameter leaving a tiny adjunct shoulder that effectively stops the case from entering the chamber too far.

That's all well and good, but remember too that once bad headspace has been corrected for in this manner you are ending up with the case protruding back out of the chamber farther before firing, leaving just that much more of it unsupported by the chamber walls.

If the new brass is purposely oiled with a cloth,there's no way your primer's will protrude,unless your chamber is like a sewer pipe which would not allow the case to slide back against the boltface.

gnoahh, we are on the way to changing from a factory hull dimension to a custom fit for a chamber that probably is oversize, but may not be. I've never made a practice of trying to memorize SAAMI drawings but I do recall that they include a tolerance of some amount for size. Seems like they vary from cartridge to cartridge as it won't make a lot of sense to have the same size tolerance for a 25 ACP as a 460 Weatherby. I haven't found a SAAMI drawing of chamber size for a 303 Savage. Don't know whether one exists. Have read on this forum that the spec calls for a 0.311 in projectile so there is some kind of SAMMI comparison. Just as a Swag, I'd gues a +/- dimension of between .003 to .005 for a Sammi spec length for this cartridge. This one may be a little longer. Yes, on a rimmed case, actual headspace is controlled by the depth of the rim--its thickness--and the condition of both the bolt face and the rim face of the chamber. What these 2 manuals quote as headspace is the distance from the back of the cartridge rim to a datum point of 0.375 dia. located on the shoulder, like with a rimless necked cartridge. Now, I don't know what was done by all manufacturers back in the day, but these Rem rounds I have closely mirror the PPU in length from the back of the head to the datum line. As you so well pointed out, case measurement is a poor way to evaluate case pressures, but until case growth is limited, pressures will certainly vary as will velocity and accuracy. Case capacity will increase to some degree and that too will provide more variance in velocity and accuracy. Makes a fellow wonder why the manu would make it so short. If growth cannot be restricted, then even with out over working the brass, head separations will occur. This PPU is good heavy brass, but it won't stretch but so far.

Yep.

Just one note: .303 Savage bullets are .308. Always have been except for a brief period after inception when they loaded the ammo with .311's in a mis-guided attempt at higher velocity via higher pressures induced by tighter fitting bullets. That dynamic was dropped around 120 years ago.

Seems to me that you could also end up with a “custom” case that may not fit into other guns. However I do realize that sometimes you have to do what it takes to make a rifle work.

Just a couple of notes on 303 Savage cases, PPU vs. SuperX

I had 12 old fired SuperX cases, average weight with spent primer 147.1 grains; water capacity to the mouth 48.7 grains

I had a couple fired PPU cases, average weight with spent primer 170.0 grains; water capacity to the mouth 45.0 grain.

Takeaways
o PPU brass in quite a bit heavier than the old 190gr SuperX cases (15.5% heavier).
o PPU brass internal capacity is 7.5% less than the SuperX cases ... the same grain load of powder and OAL in a PPU case is going to generate higher pressure.

Right there with you friend. That was the major point of 2 long posts above. The loads listed in old manuals and even most recent(10-20 yrs) magazine articles, though well done, really don't apply to this wonderful PPU brass. Don't know how the internal capacity of the current Norma offering compares. Maybe someone here could share their info if available? I've always thought that was the purpose of the BS going on around the "CAMPFIRE".

Loggerhead these weights by my RCBS scale.

Norma case with spent Winchester LR primer 164.8 grains
Filled with water 208.9 grains
water capacity 44.1 grains
I know a lot of .303 savage shooters have been using .303 savage Norma brass with current and older data and there does not appear to have been any reported issues with over pressure that I am aware of. I agree that Norma and PPU with 190 grain data will generate higher pressure than old WW or Remington brass will. Just how much of an issue is it?

Hope this adds to the discussion.

Darryl

Thanks to all of you. Great info.

I don't think it'll make a whole lot of difference unless one skates around with maximum loads. Switching to PPU brass I'll be sure to work up to the hunting load I'm now using with the W-W and Rem-UMC brass I'm currently using. (But I have so many hundreds of the older ones I may never get a chance to break open the bags of PPU's that I have in reserve.) Most of my .303 Savage loads are lower velocity mid-range loads and plinker loads, so my brass lasts forever.

20190416 - Velocity Test of Barnes 190 FP with H4895

Put some of the 190FP grain Barnes Originals over the chrono today. Since madtrapper413 tested some with 3031 and loggerhead is working with 4064 and Varget, I thought I would try some with H4895.

Hodgdon online reloading data for a 170 grain 30-30 Win lists 27.5 starting and 30.5 max, so I decided to try 25.5, 26.0 and 26.5 grains of H4895 with the Barnes 190 seated to 2.520” with no crimp. PPU brass; CCI 200 primers. Fired from a 22” 1937 Savage 99G with open sights. Chrono set at 25ft.

No issues with extraction, primers all looked similar after firing. First two sets grouped under an inch at 25 yards. 3rd set opened up to 2” (might attribute to old, tired eyes with open sights … I could barely see the 1” orange bull ).

Set 1, 4 rounds, H4895 25.5 grains – average velocity 1723fps
Set 2, 4 rounds, H4895 26.0 grains – average velocity 1734fps
Set 3, 4 rounds, H4895 26.5 grains – average velocity 1786fps

Thanks to madtrapper 143 and KeithNyst for the capacity info and the loadings with H4895. What brass and primers were utilized with H4895?