Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Reduced loads

I want to find a reduced load for my 416 Taylor. It's time to bring it out of the safe and into the light. My goal is to use some 300 grain Hawk bullets and shoot some deer with it.
I have some data I got from John Wooters WAY back in the day. It shows using a Barnes 300 gr bullet and 75-80 grains of IMR 4895 for a velocity range of 2575-2752 fps. I don't need that much speed and would be happy around 2000 FPS.
My question is can I use the reduced load formula of filling the case to the base of the bullet then use 60% of that amount as a starting point?
I have a load using IMR 3031 at 67 grains and a Speer 350gr Mag Tip bullet. How much would I reduce this load by using the 300 grain bullet?
Anyone using their Taylor's for deer?

Don't have a .416 T, but it sounds to me like you need to start casting for that beast. 2,000 fps is so easy with cast bullets I can do it.

H4895 is listed as the preferred powder by Hodgdon for reduced loads. You can take any load listing from their website and reduce the max load to it less than 60% of max. I’m guessing a 70-75% charge load would get you the velocity you are looking for.

Critical that H4895 is listed as a powder for the cartridge you're choosing.

The Hodgdon web site doesn't list the Taylor.

If you are shooting a wildcat, where did you get you loads?
Work them up?


When the powders in question are 4895, H vs I, it's not too hard to
extrapolate some safe loads.



MHO

They are very similar.
You are using IMR.
We know Hodgdon can be cut to 60% of max.


I would try 70% of the IMR load.
That's a 10% margin on the low, a 30% on the high, compensating for
differences in powder.

Then work up.

But I cut tags off mattresses. YMMV

My .416 Taylor has a 20.5" barrel. 62gr of H4895 gets 2,152 with a 400 gr bullet (TSX or A Frames). I've purchased some 350 gr speers and MT bullet works cast bullets, but have yet to load and test for them. My rifle with the peep weighs about 7.25lbs. I find that with 400s at max velocity the thing savages me with every trigger squeeze. 400s at 2,150 kick like a .375, duplicate the .450/400 or .404 Jeffrey, and flip mean brown bears backwards.

Edit to add: This rifle loaded as described above works great on deer! They die right away and don't look like they ate a grenade, plenty of eating meat to be had even with hard angle shots.

The only source of pressure-tested .416 Taylor data I've run across is Any Shot You Want, the big manual published by the now-defunct A-Square company in 1996. It only lists loads for 400-grain bullets, but one of the powders is H4895--which by then was not the old mil-surp powder but today's Australian-made version. The starting load is 65.0 grains for 2167 fps from a 24" barrel, and maximum 72.0 grains for 2379 fps.

Those would be safe with 300-grain bullets, and pretty much correlate with John's data for 300s with IMR4895, given the difference in bullet weights. One rough rule-of-thumb when changing bullet weights in the same cartridge is to add the two weights together, divide that number by two, and then divide the result by the bullet weight you want approximate data for. In this instance 400+300/2 divided by 300 equals 1.166, so an approximate starting load would be around 75 grains with 300s.

Might also note that when Hodgdon quit suggesting the 60%-of-max minimum for reduced loads with IMR4895, I talked to Ron Reiber about it, who was their head ballistician from around 1990 until he retired a couple years ago. Ron said that with piezo-transducer pressure equipment the 60% reduction sometimes resulted in erratic pressures with IMR4895, but not with H4895. But IMR4895 worked fine with somewhat less reduction, say to 75-80% below max.

For what my opinion is worth, I think you will be more than satisfied with 75-80% loads or IMR 4895 or 60% of H4895. I have never played with a 416 Taylor, but have used H4895 reduced loads in 22-250, 270, 7mm-08, 338-06 and 404 Jeffery. Typically have all been very accurate with reduced recoil. Sometime I do not even get to manual starting loads before it all comes together.

Normally when working up loads, one starts low and goes high. In this instance I would start middle and work low monitoring ballistic data, and group size as you go. You will find something that will work for you in the Taylor.

Do not get stuck on a certain velocity, let your shoulder and group size tell you when you done.

I would be looking at 4198 or RL 7, instead of using reduced H 4895 loads.. but then I do a lot of reduced loading,
as I say I don't need a 500 yd load to shoot a blacktail at 100 yds...

I work with kids a lot via Boy Scouts, who inherits Grandpa's 30/06 and then macho dad gets all pissed at their 12 year old when it kicks the snot out of the kid, and he's afraid of it..

The best would be log ago discontinued SR 4759... they canned it because it was too much of a good thing... the same reason they have raised the pricing of 4198, higher than the cost of a lot of other powders, because you use less...

any cast bullet manual would be your friend in this application, with plenty of good suggestions..

if they don't have this cartridge, you can figure out what its near to or what it is based off of, and work from that.

Best of luck finding what you are looking for...it'll be worth the effort in the long run.

I agree with the choice of 4198 or Rl7. These are two of my favorite powders for lighter loads. I like to have light practice loads for everything.
One can use 2400 but I don't like to use any powder which can allow a double charge. GD

Seafire, how do you extrapolate cast to CNC bullets for reduced loads? You have way more experience in this reduced load thing than I do. My experience is with starting loads, H4895 and Trail boss (unobtanium at the moment).

How would I go about using IMR4198, 338 Federal/338-06 and 200gr FTX bullet load? Specifically looking for a subsonic velocities, which I have easily achieved with Trail boss and my 338-06, but accuracy has been ho hum. Have not had time to play with Trail boss and my 338 Federal yet. Maybe I should just start with 4198.

If I can make my 338-06 shoot better with 4198, the Federal will go down the road.

Any experience with Accurate 4457? I do have some of that on the shelf when I was messing with smokeless in line loads. Have since moved on to BH209.

Lots of good information here. Thank to all who have contributed. My gunsmith lent me his copy of Ken Water's Pet Loads and he has data using IMR 3031 and 300 grain bullets. I have IMR 3031, 4895 and H4895 on hand so should be able to find something that will work for my intended purpose.

Sorry, Just seeing this now... October 5th.

1. 5744....most folks don't know this evidently, but that powder was actually used for a hand grenade powder.. I didn't care for it much, not only being more expensive, but since I do a lot of work with kids via Boy Scouts, 5744 has a retort louder than other powders and it can intimidate young shooters, so I don't use it a lot, but never noted accuracy issues with it.

2. 338/06 and 338 Federal using 4198, and chasing subsonic loads. That is a contradiction. For the 338/06 ( I shoot one) I'd be looking at data for the 35 Whelen. Lyman Cast Bullet manual # 4, the powder I would be looking at would be Unique.. use no filler. and no Magnum primers. See what 10 grains of Unique gives you for MV and accuracy. I've had good luck with it

3. For 06 based cases, and also with 308 based cases, for a decent reduced load, my catch all charge is 30 grains of 4198 ( I prefer IMRs version), RL 7 can be substituted with the same charge...for 308 based cases you can reduce that down to 20 grains and its still works great for accuracy, and gives decent velocity. Just don't use hard bullets like Partitions etc. Ballistic tips work real well. My favorite powder was deleted out of production, but SR 4759 was my favorite for that type of service. Always accurate, even in barrels close to being shot out. In my 338/06, I use to load 200 grain FN bullets intended for the old 33 Win, and the charge was 35 grains of SR 4759, which out of my 24 inch barrel model 70, gave me 2400 fps. I had good luck with that combo....

for 308 based case, I'd look for 358 Win Load data for the 338 Federal. You should find some load data in there that should make you smile, for accuracy and trimming down the recoil level.

Hope this input helps you out finding what you're looking for.

I have routinely used Lyman's cast bullet manuals for reduced load info. If I were starting from scratch I would acquire all of them to date, there's only four. As for substituting jacketed for cast at the low end, why not. Sure there'll be discrepancies in pressure but in reality we're talking extremely low pressure either way (relative to "factory" pressures) so where's the harm? If there is indeed harm, I'm all ears. The main risk that I see is in trying to go too slow.

The only "bad" experience I ever had when shooting subsonic with jacketed bullets was long ago when I substituted 150 grain Sierras for my usual 155 grain plain based cast bullets in .30-40 Krag "backyard" loads. I discovered pretty abruptly that 5 grains Red Dot wasn't enough to push a jacketed bullet the whole way through the bore whereas it did with lead, quite accurately as I recall. (My teenaged self tended to learn lessons the hard way. It took a destroyed sectional cleaning rod - beating on it with a claw hammer, an ass-chewing from my Old Man, and another ass-chewing from the local gunsmith before that lodged bullet became unlodged - drilled out in a lathe slick as a whistle.)

In this day and age of burgeoning suppressor use perhaps the best route is to find a reduced load in the 1400-1600fps neighborhood that meets accuracy reqs, and then suppress it to mouse-fart loudness and rock on.

Appreciate all the info on the powders I have not tried.

Thank you

Seafire,

"5744....most folks don't know this evidently, but that powder was actually used for a hand grenade powder.. I didn't care for it much, not only being more expensive, but since I do a lot of work with kids via Boy Scouts, 5744 has a retort louder than other powders and it can intimidate young shooters, so I don't use it a lot, but never noted accuracy issues with it."

I have never heard that 5744 was used for a hand grenade powder, but would imagine a bunch of powders would work for that purpose. As one old saying goes, "Close only counts in hand grenades and throwing horseshoes."

Also don't know about the louder report "problem," probably because like a lot of older shooters my hearing isn't as good as it used to be. But were the Boy Scouts wearing hearing protection?

If 5744 wasn't an excellent reduced-load powders, then a BUNCH of black-powder cartridge shooters wouldn't be using it for reproducing the velocities of black powder loads for practice, without the hassle of cleaning the bore so often. I've used it myself for that purpose myself in several cartridges.

Have also gotten excellent reduced load results with it in cartridges from the .17 Hornady Hornet on up. In the .17 Hornet it reproduced the ballistics of the ill-fated .17 Hornady Mach 2 with excellent accuracy--and a very mild report.

Along with all that, 5744 is an excellent powder for standard-velocity loads in the .223 Remington and .308 Winchester--all of which is why I've found it one of the most versatile powders, and keep plenty of hand.

JB, just seeing this post above....

When you work with kids, its sort of like female shooters...they notice things that most of us guys who are use to shooting don't notice.

From their reaction, I have noticed that 5744, just like reduced loads of H 4895, seem to have a louder bark to me, that other powders, especially when reduced load applications are used. I don't find that with 4198 and RL 7, Boys seem to handle those fine. It is not the "recoil" of 5744, it is more the 'bark'.. at least to the kids... older boys not so much... 10 and 12 year old range in age. Yeah, it intimidates many of them....

then their are other boys, the louder the boom the more they love it...I had a cousin like that growing up... His first rifle at 10 yr old was a 300 Weatherby.. family handed on down to him for Christmas.. after shooting a bunch of them, he wanted the 300 Wby. Shot his first deer with it, even tho he couldn't hold the rifle up to shoot, but could rest it on the second rail of an old 3 rail wooden fence... Jeff gave that rifle to his son, when he turned 6. That kid, like his dad, killed his first couple of deer, resting the end of the stock on the second rail of the fence on the family farm.

and of course the Boy Scouts were wearing Hearing protection. Dads are there with them, when we do events like this, which has usually been over at our local range here in Grants Pass. so nice facilities, not a bench out in the woods on Forest Service land.

I don't have a 17 Hornet, but I do have a 17 Fireball, and just rebarreled a Savage in 35 Legend ( that I bought on Walmart close out, for the action to do this).. it has an 18 inch barrel, just like the contour on the 35 Legend barrel that came off of it. I've got a couple pounds of 5744. I'll have to give that a whirl in the 17 Fireball.... thanks for bringing that to my attention. I understand it is a real versatile powder, I just end up using lower cost "versatile powders"...and then there is also my "fame' for doing things off the beaten path. Lately been playing with ringing steel at the range at 300 and 400 yds, with a 223 and 55 grains bullets, with 10 grains of Unique... cheap practice and gives one a work out on trajectory and how to use it.

And 5744 being used by the Czech as a powder for hand grenades, actually read that in some literature one time, when the powder was fairly new.. that was in some info by Western Powders or Accurate.. whoever carries it.

The last time I use 5744 was in a 30-06. Bullet was the Lyman #311284, roughly 220 gr. + or - from a Browning B78 rifle with 26" barrel. The load was 25.0 gr. Frankly, my hearing is so bad now that if 5744 did produce a louder report, I wouldn't be able to tell the difference.

PJ

I got into reduced loads a few years back however recently have opted for reduced cartridge loaded to pressure instead! Cartridges loaded to pressure burn cleaner and seal the chamber in an appropriate manner. I have noted that a 223 loaded to pressure with a 55 grain Barnes TTSX kills a bit better than a 270 with reduced recoil loads and kicks less at the same time. I'm comparing from examples of a few deer so perhaps it was chance but tje deer with a 223 loaded to 3300 fps died faster IMLE. Nothing wrong with doing a reduced load however, I thought I would bring it up for the crowd of loonies that always think from various angles

Trystan