So far just 180 bt's and 190 accubonds. A few 150 and 165 nosler ballistic tips. They will stay around 2 inches but the 190 was my best grouper with RL 22 until winter. I loaded up a few lots of 180 ballistic tips with h414 tonight and will load some of each with the imr 4350 and duplicate a few with h4350 to try.
30-06 powders
- Thread starter Wendyj
- Start date
reloader28
New member
I always work up my hunting loads at a temp like hunting season. For me the groups really open up in warm weather and pressures seem higher, but I'm shooting at max loads.
supercub99
New member
Wendy, I have a Rem 700 LR in 30-06 and played around with bullets and powders all summer. I really liked the Hornady 178 gr Eld-x but only had one box and none to be found so I couldn't go any further at the time. I went to the 200 gr. Eld-x because I could get them. Usually I like H4831sc, have used it for years but that 700 didn't seem to get under an inch with it. I went to Imr 4350 and it loves it. 1/2 in at 100 + and very reliable. That was the best I could come up with and shot a bison with that load this past fall. Pole axe shot behind the ear. Found the bullet, lost .5 gr.
I finally got a stock of the 178's now and will work up a load for those, most likely see if I can get the new Imr 4451 all temp powder to work. If not, I'll try the H4831sc or the 4350.
Kurt
I finally got a stock of the 178's now and will work up a load for those, most likely see if I can get the new Imr 4451 all temp powder to work. If not, I'll try the H4831sc or the 4350.
Kurt
ShootistPRS
New member
Wendy,
You have more than enough good information in this thread already but I want to tell you that in my 3006 (a very old 03A3) I have gotten sub MOA groups with bullet weights from 125 through 190 grains using just two powders and adjusting the charge weight. I don't try to set the bullets close to the lands, it would be impossible in this old gun, I use the listed length in the book for the overall length. The two powders that have worked for me, in my gun, are H4895 (a totally different powder than IMR4895 and needs different load data) and H414. Hodgdon calls this powder (414) "simply ideal in the 3006" and that has been my experience. With my 24" barrel (military issue 1942) The loads I use are between 95 and 97% of maximum listed loads. No two barrels are the same and your experience will likely differ from mine. I can't shoot 220 grain bullets in my gun because they hit a 100 yard target sideways. The 1:10 twist in my gun will stabilize short bullets down to 125 and up to the 190 grain bullets that I have used. I have found that WW and CCI primers work best in most cases for consistent groups.
I much prefer the 165 grain SpBT bullets and have consistent groups under 3/4 inch at 100 yards. I use my gun for hunting and casual target shooting. Just so you know where I am coming from.
You have more than enough good information in this thread already but I want to tell you that in my 3006 (a very old 03A3) I have gotten sub MOA groups with bullet weights from 125 through 190 grains using just two powders and adjusting the charge weight. I don't try to set the bullets close to the lands, it would be impossible in this old gun, I use the listed length in the book for the overall length. The two powders that have worked for me, in my gun, are H4895 (a totally different powder than IMR4895 and needs different load data) and H414. Hodgdon calls this powder (414) "simply ideal in the 3006" and that has been my experience. With my 24" barrel (military issue 1942) The loads I use are between 95 and 97% of maximum listed loads. No two barrels are the same and your experience will likely differ from mine. I can't shoot 220 grain bullets in my gun because they hit a 100 yard target sideways. The 1:10 twist in my gun will stabilize short bullets down to 125 and up to the 190 grain bullets that I have used. I have found that WW and CCI primers work best in most cases for consistent groups.
I much prefer the 165 grain SpBT bullets and have consistent groups under 3/4 inch at 100 yards. I use my gun for hunting and casual target shooting. Just so you know where I am coming from.
Note that "ideal" labeling is for bolt guns. Same as with 4350, H414 is too slow for the Garand gas system. The Western Cannon spherical powder the military had made for .30-06 ball ammo is what is sold to handloaders as H380 (canister grade WC852) and it works in the Garand with 150 grain bullets. When you go to heavier bullets than that, it can run a Garand gas system a bit hard.
ShootistPRS
New member
Very valid point Unclenick. I must have missed the mention of this being a semi-auto. H4895 does have loads for semi-autos.
Uncle Nick said:
"It was actually IMR 4895. Back when 30-06 was still a common match cartridge (50's and 60's), Hodgdon was a relatively new business (started in 1952) and his H4895 was rebranded surplus IMR 4895. Government manufactured match ammunition used bulk grade IMR 4895.
The current H4895 is Australian made low temperature sensitivity powder (part of Hodgdon's Extreme line) with a similar burn rate at standard temperatures, though most manuals use a little less H4895 than they do IMR 4895 in .30-06 loads, indicating the H4895 is a little faster. Perhaps it is made to match whatever surplus lot Hodgdon had when they made the switch. I don't know, but if you ask them they might tell you."
Interesting stuff, that H4895. After the war,(WW2) IMR 4895 was about as scarce as hen's teeth so what was available was what Hodgden had. It came in large kegs and you scooped it into a bag and paid your money. You got a load data sheet of sorts that would say, "Use 3031 data" or "Use 4320 data". Some even said "Use 4064 data". Finally Hodgden combined the whole mess into on homogenous powder that came close to IMR 4895 but was slightly slower. How or why current IMR 4895 is now slower than Hodgden's version is beyond me.
That old stuff was darn good powder and cheap. A paper bag with about a pound in it was something like fifty cents as I recall. I burned a lot of that powder in my old 1917 Enfield I had way back then. That and a whole lot of 150 gr. Sierra spitzer flat base bullets. They didn't call them Pro-Hunters back then.
Paul B.
"It was actually IMR 4895. Back when 30-06 was still a common match cartridge (50's and 60's), Hodgdon was a relatively new business (started in 1952) and his H4895 was rebranded surplus IMR 4895. Government manufactured match ammunition used bulk grade IMR 4895.
The current H4895 is Australian made low temperature sensitivity powder (part of Hodgdon's Extreme line) with a similar burn rate at standard temperatures, though most manuals use a little less H4895 than they do IMR 4895 in .30-06 loads, indicating the H4895 is a little faster. Perhaps it is made to match whatever surplus lot Hodgdon had when they made the switch. I don't know, but if you ask them they might tell you."
Interesting stuff, that H4895. After the war,(WW2) IMR 4895 was about as scarce as hen's teeth so what was available was what Hodgden had. It came in large kegs and you scooped it into a bag and paid your money. You got a load data sheet of sorts that would say, "Use 3031 data" or "Use 4320 data". Some even said "Use 4064 data". Finally Hodgden combined the whole mess into on homogenous powder that came close to IMR 4895 but was slightly slower. How or why current IMR 4895 is now slower than Hodgden's version is beyond me.
That old stuff was darn good powder and cheap. A paper bag with about a pound in it was something like fifty cents as I recall. I burned a lot of that powder in my old 1917 Enfield I had way back then. That and a whole lot of 150 gr. Sierra spitzer flat base bullets. They didn't call them Pro-Hunters back then.
Paul B.
I have had some very accurate loads using H4895 myself in both the several '06's that we have as well as my .308 using both 150 and 165'ish grain bullets.
Never had a real need for anything heavier. A couple of years ago I picked up a couple boxes of REM CL's in both calibers and worked up loads for both using REM bulk bullets in 150&165gre using H4985. Both calibers easily matched the factory velocity's as well as topping the accuracy. Best part was that the factory and handloads both shot close enough to each other that in a pinch I can just use factory if I run out or forget my loads at the house. Yep been there dun that....
I
Never had a real need for anything heavier. A couple of years ago I picked up a couple boxes of REM CL's in both calibers and worked up loads for both using REM bulk bullets in 150&165gre using H4985. Both calibers easily matched the factory velocity's as well as topping the accuracy. Best part was that the factory and handloads both shot close enough to each other that in a pinch I can just use factory if I run out or forget my loads at the house. Yep been there dun that....
I
kilimanjaro
New member
4895 is my go-to powder for the WWII 30-caliber cartridges.
I think both groups are fine. This really reads as the Texas Sharpshooter fallacy. https://youarenotsosmart.com/2010/09/11/the-texas-sharpshooter-fallacy/ Try shooting some 20 shot groups. Five shot groups don't provide much information about the inherent accuracy of any load, and both of your groups may fit inside a 20 shot group, (better yet, 40 shot groups).
I have shot in competition in 100 F weather, and I have shot XTC matches in the snow. I have never shot in extreme temperatures conditions as well as I do in nice, sunny 50-60 F weather. I am plenty warm in 50 F weather because I wear a quilted shooting jacket! In cold weather I wrap my cold hands around the rifle barrel after a rapid fire sequence to warm up my cold fingers. It is hard to shoot straight when you can't feel your index finger!
Don't expect to shoot as well in frosty winter as in spring time.
By the way, the 1:10 twist will shoot 125 grain through 220 grain 30 caliber bullets equally well. I think the Krag used a 1:10 and a 220, and the original 30-06 may have been a 220 with a 1:10 twist barrel. I have shot tens of thousands of 190's in 1:10 twist 30 caliber barrels. I had buds shooting 125 grain 308 bullets, standing and sitting rapid fire, in their 1:10 twist M1a barrels. I have shot good groups in a 1:10 with 110 grain varmint loads.
I have shot in competition in 100 F weather, and I have shot XTC matches in the snow. I have never shot in extreme temperatures conditions as well as I do in nice, sunny 50-60 F weather. I am plenty warm in 50 F weather because I wear a quilted shooting jacket! In cold weather I wrap my cold hands around the rifle barrel after a rapid fire sequence to warm up my cold fingers. It is hard to shoot straight when you can't feel your index finger!
Don't expect to shoot as well in frosty winter as in spring time.
By the way, the 1:10 twist will shoot 125 grain through 220 grain 30 caliber bullets equally well. I think the Krag used a 1:10 and a 220, and the original 30-06 may have been a 220 with a 1:10 twist barrel. I have shot tens of thousands of 190's in 1:10 twist 30 caliber barrels. I had buds shooting 125 grain 308 bullets, standing and sitting rapid fire, in their 1:10 twist M1a barrels. I have shot good groups in a 1:10 with 110 grain varmint loads.
ShootistPRS
New member
My 3006 printed 220 grain bullets sideways on a 100 yard target. It is an 03A3 with 1:10 rifling. I was shooting at sea level +100 feet at most in cool temps and in low humidity. Apparently not all 30 caliber guns will shoot 220 grain bullets with a 1:10 twist.
That's weird. I have shot 220 ish grain cast bullets out of my M1903A3 and Ruger #1, both 1:10 twist barrels and they did OK. Cast bullets require a lot of experimentation to make them shoot reasonably well. I tried 174 ish grain cast bullets in my M1a, it has a 1:10 twist, they keyholed and I gave up the experiment. My two grove M1903A3 shoots cast better than the four groove.
I have shot 200 grain bullets in my 1:10 30-06 Match rifle all the way to 1000 yards. They did not keyhole, they will shoot Master to HM at 600 yard. I am the limiting factory at 1000 yards, I really struggle at 1000 yards. I never shot 220 grain 308 bullets because, I don't have any, and I never bought any because the 200 grain bullets kick hard enough for me not to go looking for ways to increase the pain.
supercub99
New member
Quote:
"My 3006 printed 220 grain bullets sideways on a 100 yard target. It is an 03A3 with 1:10 rifling. I was shooting at sea level +100 feet at most in cool temps and in low humidity. Apparently not all 30 caliber guns will shoot 220 grain bullets with a 1:10 twist."
You have a problem with your bore. My guess is the throat is eaten out for several inches if not more. I have/had more 1903's and A3's than I care to think about and all of them with the exception of one shot 125 to 220 gr bullets very well. There were more 03's and A3's used to make sporters out of after the wars than you can imagine. They used 220 gr bullets as common as anything else.
That one 03 that wouldn't shoot them?....it was a Springfield Mark 1 in 100% original condition. It had served honor duty at national cemeteries after the war and shot thousands of blanks without cleaning. The first almost 1/3 of the barrel was eaten out, the rest was fine. Keyholes at 50 yards was the result. You could drop a throat gauge down that gun and if it weren't for the 90 deg. handle with would have fallen down a long ways.
I would have that bore looked at with a scope and see what it looks like. Other than that it would be a nasty crown problem or a real light load?
It isn't the norm, that's for sure.
Kurt
"My 3006 printed 220 grain bullets sideways on a 100 yard target. It is an 03A3 with 1:10 rifling. I was shooting at sea level +100 feet at most in cool temps and in low humidity. Apparently not all 30 caliber guns will shoot 220 grain bullets with a 1:10 twist."
You have a problem with your bore. My guess is the throat is eaten out for several inches if not more. I have/had more 1903's and A3's than I care to think about and all of them with the exception of one shot 125 to 220 gr bullets very well. There were more 03's and A3's used to make sporters out of after the wars than you can imagine. They used 220 gr bullets as common as anything else.
That one 03 that wouldn't shoot them?....it was a Springfield Mark 1 in 100% original condition. It had served honor duty at national cemeteries after the war and shot thousands of blanks without cleaning. The first almost 1/3 of the barrel was eaten out, the rest was fine. Keyholes at 50 yards was the result. You could drop a throat gauge down that gun and if it weren't for the 90 deg. handle with would have fallen down a long ways.
I would have that bore looked at with a scope and see what it looks like. Other than that it would be a nasty crown problem or a real light load?
It isn't the norm, that's for sure.
Kurt
May or may not be a problem. The .30-40 Krag shot a 200 grain bullet and the .30-03 shot a 220 grain bullet. (.30-06 was developed when the switch to 150 grain Spitzer was made.) Both the Krag and .30-03 bullets, however, were round nose, so they were short compared, at the other extreme, a 220 grain VLD.
Folks easily forget that it is bullet length that primarily determines how much twist it will need. The more weight you cram into its length, the less twist you need, but only in proportion to the square root of that mass, where the proportion is directly related to length. You see this in the full version of the old Greenhill formula (here you see length in the denominator because the twist unit is expressed as pitch, which is in unit length/turn, rather than as twist, which is in turns/unit length, and which would require Greenhill to be rearranged to put length the numerator).
So, whether the keyhole meant there is a gun problem or if it were simply due to an over-long bullet, or a normally long bullet combined with inadequate velocity (another factor that reduces required spin), I can't say.
Paul B.,
The burn rate discrepancy will be due to the fact the surplus IMR 4895 Hodgdon bought (the way he started his business) was bulk grade powder. If you look at National Match loads of IMR 4895 bulk powder, you find they varied from 46.0 grains to 48.5 grains between 1961 and 1966, with the lighter loads actually producing higher tested velocities (the tolerances allow a 60 fps span, IIRC). The burn rates of the bulk grades of powder used during those years clearly varied a good bit, and Hodgdon's purchase must have been powder on the faster end of the range.
The powders developed for the reloading market specifically, are called canister grade powders. They go through additional testing and adjusting to make the burn rate more consistent and closer to the powder type's nominal value. This is necessary because handloaders don't typically own pressure testing equipment to adjust their charge weights with, where commercial loaders of new ammunition do. The tighter burn rate tolerance is needed for load manual recipes to remain valid. Bulk powder burn rates vary too much for that to work, but they cost less to produce.
Folks easily forget that it is bullet length that primarily determines how much twist it will need. The more weight you cram into its length, the less twist you need, but only in proportion to the square root of that mass, where the proportion is directly related to length. You see this in the full version of the old Greenhill formula (here you see length in the denominator because the twist unit is expressed as pitch, which is in unit length/turn, rather than as twist, which is in turns/unit length, and which would require Greenhill to be rearranged to put length the numerator).
So, whether the keyhole meant there is a gun problem or if it were simply due to an over-long bullet, or a normally long bullet combined with inadequate velocity (another factor that reduces required spin), I can't say.
Paul B.,
The burn rate discrepancy will be due to the fact the surplus IMR 4895 Hodgdon bought (the way he started his business) was bulk grade powder. If you look at National Match loads of IMR 4895 bulk powder, you find they varied from 46.0 grains to 48.5 grains between 1961 and 1966, with the lighter loads actually producing higher tested velocities (the tolerances allow a 60 fps span, IIRC). The burn rates of the bulk grades of powder used during those years clearly varied a good bit, and Hodgdon's purchase must have been powder on the faster end of the range.
The powders developed for the reloading market specifically, are called canister grade powders. They go through additional testing and adjusting to make the burn rate more consistent and closer to the powder type's nominal value. This is necessary because handloaders don't typically own pressure testing equipment to adjust their charge weights with, where commercial loaders of new ammunition do. The tighter burn rate tolerance is needed for load manual recipes to remain valid. Bulk powder burn rates vary too much for that to work, but they cost less to produce.