Page 3 of 3

Re: Experiences of a a Novice Reloader

Posted: 21 Jul 2019 04:24
by Coote
Thanks Mr Surveyor. Do you shoot both jacketed and cast lead projectiles out of the same gun? If so, do you have some special cleaning program you follow after you've fired the jacketed rounds? I've heard things that suggest that barrels with copper fouling may not shoot lead so well afterwards. I've never experimented, preferring to shoot just one or the other in a certain rifle. And frankly I don't think the problem is likely to be all that significant if the rifle has a good bore and the lead bullets have good lubricant. But I certainly would be interested to learn about other peoples' views on this.

Re: Experiences of a a Novice Reloader

Posted: 21 Jul 2019 04:58
by GasGuzzler
What is twist rate on the "Bergara break-action single shot .357"? I am having trouble finding any information on that rifle. I'm guessing it's 1:16" or so for it to shoot so well with such low velocity. If you want an R92 to shoot you gotta push it a lot harder than 900 FPS because of the 1:30" twist...and TrailBoss won't come close.

Re: Experiences of a a Novice Reloader

Posted: 21 Jul 2019 05:42
by Coote
I haven't found any info on what the Bergara twist rate is. I will push a cleaning rod through it and see what it indicates... then report back. It certainly appears to have more twist than the Rossi.

Re: Experiences of a a Novice Reloader

Posted: 21 Jul 2019 17:15
by Ranch Dog
The Bergara looks like what CVA was importing in first as the Hunter and then the Scout. I don't think they ever offered it in 357 Mag. The website currently shows the only offering as the 44 Mag. I had a Hunter chambered in 35 Rem. A friend of mine liked it so well; I gave it to him.

The CVA Scout 44 Mag lists a 1:20 twist. The SAAMI spec for a 44 Mag rifle calls for 1:38. At least someone is using their noggin!

Re: Experiences of a a Novice Reloader

Posted: 21 Jul 2019 20:46
by Coote
I just pushed a cleaning rod with a tight patch down the bore. The barrel is pretty short (16.5 inches) and when you subtract the chamber length from that there isn't much to work with. So my rod did not make one complete turn in the rifling. I made a mark on the rod and when it turned about 180 degrees I measured the distance it had travelled through the bore then doubled it for the calculation. It appears that the rifling twist is close to one turn in 18 inches. Maybe 17. I should do it again with something better than a pen mark on the rod... maybe a bit of wire sticking out radially.

It seems like Bergara made a batch of these .357s because the NZ importer asked specifically for them.

I've seen them around here in .308 and 44 magnum. I think there is also a 45-70 available. The .44 mag often gets referred to as a 'pigger' as they are marketing it to the guys who hunt hogs with dogs.

The bare rifle is priced at NZ$1000 down here. By comparison, the latest price for a .357 Rossi 92 in stainless with a 16 inch barrel is around NZ$1200. The Henry .357 single shot was going to cost me NZ$899.

Re: Experiences of a a Novice Reloader

Posted: 29 Oct 2019 12:40
by Archer
mikld wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:The reloading bullies will hate me for this but in my experience, magnum primers are required for nearly nothing. There may be a very small bench rest gain in one or two applications but I haven't found it.

The ADI AP2205 should work very well with the 158 if it is similar to H110 or W296...my second favorite .357 powders to A2400.
I only have a use for Magnum primers with two (3?) powders; W231/H110 and WC 820. My other powders don't seem to notice much if any difference when a load work-up is done with Magnum primers...
I think mikld intended to say he used Magnum Primers with W296/H110 and WC 820.
AFAIK Winchester 231 is a quick easily ignited powder comparable to Bullseye.

I highly recommend the article at the following link and printed in the Speer #12 Manual:
http://www.leverguns.com/articles/ballisticians.htm
"Why Ballisticians Get Grey"

As an engineer you should know the differences caused by tolerances and if you think about the way the data you are using is devleoped you will realize you are dealing with a system with a lot of factors where exact results are almost impossible. There are often a lot of factors that may not be recorded or that you might not have considered when you are doing your load development vs. what the developers have done.

There's a lot of good information in the posts above and a lot of practical knowledge.

I tend to be one of the guys who goes by the book with regard to primer type. If the book calls for 'LMP' or 'SMP" I will tend to use those primers. As one of the other replies mentioned one of my concerns is wide temperature swings. I once developed a light target load for .45 ACP at normal 70-80 degree temps that failed miserably in freezing weather. On the other end of the spectrum I once was at an indoor range firing ammunition that had been loaded using a book recipe that should have put it right about 825 FPS. The ammunition had been in the trunk of the car for 6 hours during high summer with temps over 100F before we hit the range around 2PM. It just so happened that there was a chrony at the range that day and that warm to the touch ammo was pushing over 1000 FPS. While a magnum primer may not be required for igniting even magnum ball powder in normal conditions it may be a darned good thing when the temp drops 60-80 degrees. I may not be in that situation very often but having seen the results with that light target load I mentioned I tend to load wide range of conditions in mind.

Another reason I use published recipes as a guide is I tend to have multiple firearms in the same caliber. While I can and sometimes do load specifically for one of those guns I tend to load the majority of my ammo in such a way it is usable in ANY of the firearms I own in that caliber and can be safely used in any modern firearm in that caliber that is in good condition. I may push certain loads (.45-70 Govt in particular) or load a specific load for a particular weapon but those rounds are clearly marked.

I've probably got 8 or 10 distinctly different load manuals in addition I've picked up several different editions of many of them in an effort to keep up with new calibers, new powders and new projectiles over the years. If you compare the data in them you will find it varies from publisher to publisher and sometimes is revised by a given publisher.

You aren't looking to not exceed the published velocity. Yes that's one indicator of pressure but there are a lot of other factors that can change the numbers. You are looking for consistency of your ammo and a safe accurate and effective load.