Fat (.310 - .311) Bullets in the 1917

[Ken in Iowa]

I was surprised to read the other day that the 1917 has a .300 bore diameter with a .005 nominal groove depth. This equates to a .310 groove diameter.

My Remington with the original 9-18 dated barrel is not a tackdriver with .308 bullets. M2 ball is quite disappointing and GI Match ammo is OK shooting about 1.5" groups at 50 yards.

The throat is rather short as some lots of GI Match are firmly engaging the lands. The bore is decent but on the dark/frosted side even after a couple sessions with an electronic bore cleaner.

Yesterday, I fired some handloads using classic 30/06 recipes to see if I could improve. This included 50-52 gr H4350 with Hornady 190 gr BTHP match bullets and 46-48 gr of IMR 4064 with GI 173 gr BTFMJ match bullets. Cases were once fired GI Match with CCI #200 primers.

Accuracy was about the same as with GI Match, about 1.5" or a bit better. I believe that I bracketed the optimal powder charges with these test loads.

This leaves me with a 3 MOA rifle shooting the best available bullets. Grrr.

I have read that some folks have found better accuracy shooting .310 or .311 bullets. I have some Sierra 150 and 180 gr .311 SP and Hornady .3105 174 gr BTFMJ on hand.

Has anyone given these a try?

[RC20]

There has been quite some discussion through various threads on the subject. I ran a search and got more expanded info.

http://forums.gunboards.com/showthread.php?139675-Model-1917-bore-condition

Also keep in mind, good stock seat and the stock pressure on the barrel is important (or can be). I finally got more consistent result by putting a bit of up pressure on the barrel (along with the right setback)

The best response has been a poster by the name of Bob S (CMP and some other forums) like the link above.

His take is that its not only a shootable combo, its more accurate in the guns that have the original 5 grove left twist barells (WWII replacement barrels were made to 1903 specs)

Where there may be some question as to why the US did not reduce the .0050 dimension to a more nominal value that suited the 308 diameter bullets better,.

The difficulty is that the Brits designed the 5 grove deep barrel to deal with their erosion issues in 303. Using that basis, they should have been shooting .314 bullets for best accuracy. Neither the US or Brits were stupid, amazing good in fact, so they had to be aware of the aspects of that (the Pattern 13 being a move to get more accuracy and range for the Brits from the SMLE

However there is also the erosion aspect and the deep grove, narrow grove and wide land if I have that right was designed to extend barrel life. Our powders are different now as well.

For casual shooters I don't think it makes any difference and casual shooters using lower load levels probably none. What would happen with a steady diet of 311 155 gr at 2900 FPS I don't know and for us it does not matter.

I am currently shooting the .308 175gr SBT in mine and plan on trying the 311 174 Sierras in the guns that don't shoot those well.

My loads are a bit below your range in 4350, but I have gotten good results by using a 3.270 COAL,

My brother gets credit for an explanation in that the 1917 uses an abrupt rifling system, mine typically engage at .3305, where as the 1903s are tapers and I get engagement at 3.340.

The 1917 seems to like a bit of distance off the engagement, so that’s what I do. If my eyes were consistent I think I could shoot 1.5 inch at 100. I can get equivalent MOA at 50, but sight picture is harder for me at 100, I shoot a lot at 75 to challenge that and see if I can move it on out.

[Ken in Iowa]

Thanks for the link and your response. After reading that old thread, I wish that I had some HXP to try. I have tried several lots of LC and TW M2 ball dated from 54 to 72 with basically the same result. Sierra 150 gr handloads that shoot great in my Garand aren't happy in the 1917 either.

I believe that I'll reduce the powder charge a grain or two and try those .3105 bullets. I don't see where it will hurt. That's why they created a bullet puller, right?

If that doesn't pan out, I'll revisit seating depth and bedding.

[Tuna]

Try loading to 2700 fps for your 1917 with 150 gr. bullets. Do not try to push it as the original 150 gr. load was the 2700 fps mark. Make sure also you are shooting a flat base bullet. The 1917 in general does not like the boat tail bullets in the 150 gr. range. It seems that a load of IMR 3031 at 2700 fps works well as this powder is close to the originals. This is what I have found in my Eddystone and my Remington 1917 rifles.

[RC20]

Thanks for the link and your response. After reading that old thread, I wish that I had some HXP to try. I have tried several lots of LC and TW M2 ball dated from 54 to 72 with basically the same result. Sierra 150 gr handloads that shoot great in my Garand aren't happy in the 1917 either.

I believe that I'll reduce the powder charge a grain or two and try those .3105 bullets. I don't see where it will hurt. That's why they created a bullet puller, right?

If that doesn't pan out, I'll revisit seating depth and bedding.

You are welcome. Definitely interesing in any reports on gthe 311 class bullets and what powder charge.

I am leery of any steady diet of HXP. Its hot stuff and the bullets are steel (copper clad or gilded) . I have not seen anyone authoratatvie do a report on HXP and wear.

I have some HXP, use it for sight in and sometimes an initial shot to heat up barrel but nothing else.

My loads currently are using the 175 gr Sierra and the slower speeds seem to work fine with that one.

Keeping in mind that the original 30-06 (30-03) was a 220 gr round nose at very slow speeds, then they went to the 150s Spitzer. The 1-10 handles and amazing breadth of bullets at a lot of different speeds.

My 4350 loading is 49 gr and the Remington does very well with that, the other guns not quite as good but the 311s may help there to.

COAL was far more important than any given speed. the 49 was what I was using when I hit on the 3.270 and have stuck with it.

I think various other powders in that speed range would work keeping in mind the case load needs and some of them may need a magnum primer.

[Ken in Iowa]

I just got back from the range. PERFECT day here in Iowa...

I tried the Hornady 174 gr .3105" FMJBT bullets with 4064. The fat bullet forces you to seat the bullet about .050" deeper than the USGI 173 match bullet. I ended up about .020" off the lands. My loads from the other day were just touching or engaged about .010"

With 45.0, 46.0 and 46.5 gr of 4064 groups were significantly tighter. Best was 1.00" and worst 1.23" Point of impact was extremely close across the range of powder, so I would pick 46.0 and start playing with seating depth next. Normal pressure signs were noted.

I might be inclined to try the 174 gr Sierra .311 since I have a small supply. I see that Grafs actually has some in stock too.

[RC20]

What yardage? Good groups and nice constancy. I don't care the size so much when working up a setting, its if its consistent and a good pattern.

Natchez has the Sierra 174s in 100s and 500 counts. I have a couple of the 100s headed this way.

[older than dirt]

I went online & checked some ammo sites for the .310-.311 bullets & they are listed as British .303`s. Is this correct?

[Ken in Iowa]

What yardage? Good groups and nice constancy. I don't care the size so much when working up a setting, its if its consistent and a good pattern.

Natchez has the Sierra 174s in 100s and 500 counts. I have a couple of the 100s headed this way.

So far everything has been done at 50 yards. *Cases used are FA57 match. *Powder used are newer -Canadian IMR4064- Australian H4350 *The Hornady .3105 174 gr actually mics at .310"

We are both getting to the point - with the Sierra 174 .311s - where the case/chamber necks are getting snug. My fired FA57 match cases will not accept the .311 bullet, but they do accept the Hornady .3105 bullet. This is safe and actually good for accurate bullet alignment, but we are getting close to 'too tight'

Further the short leade to the lands is forcing the bullet seating depth deep enough where the bearing surface of the bullet is right down to the base of the case neck at least in my rifle. This is another area of concern due to brass flow of fired cases and resizing.

I found a small batch of 10 Winchester commercial cases that mic .002" smaller in the neck. I will use these if and when I use the Sierra .311s.

Please use care with those .311s my friend. We are nearing the ragged edge.

[Ken in Iowa]

I went online & checked some ammo sites for the .310-.311 bullets & they are listed as British .303`s. Is this correct?

Yes, these fat .310-.311 bullets are normally used for 303 British, 7.7 Jap and Russian 7.62 rifles.

We are trying to find the best accuracy with the Model 1917 which has deeper grooves (.005") than the typical US 30/06 barrel (.004") These are the nominal specs of the rifles.

[RC20]

Something to keep in mind is the necks get stiff and at some point either need to be annealed or replaced.

I am playing with annealing but its a tricky issue with temperature control.

Better to under heat than over, once too much the case won't return.

Internet wisdom is heat to color change to low red, really that's too hot, color change short of orange or red and that's a tough line to walk.

so far better than not but still working on it, got my fist ones a bit too hot (the color change should polish off) but not by a lot. No more neck cracks and better seating (it was getting very hard)

Lot of opinions but its both a temperature and a time (if you can heat at the lower temp long enough it does the same as higher temp shorter>

[Ken in Iowa]

Good point on annealing the necks. With .311" bullets and standard 30/06 dies, we are overworking the necks a bit.

The same holds true with the 7.62x54r Russian cartridge. Many sizing dies are setup for .308" bullets. If using fatter .310" or .311" bullets, there is an option to use a larger expander ball.

My old Lyman 7.62x54r FL die is setup for .308" bullets. Instead of going the expander ball route, I purchased a Lyman "M" die for 31 caliber which was designed for 303 British. http://www.midwayusa.com/product/199...ProductFinding

I have been using this tool to expand the 30/06 brass that I have been using with the fat bullets. It works perfectly for this chore.

It looks to be another fine day in Iowa. I have the COAL test loads ready to go. I hope to get to the range this afternoon.

[RC20]

Good shooting, I am odd sift weekend and try to shoot today, errands and cloudy and cooler, maybe tomorrow (mine have not arrive yet)

I will see how my ordered 303s do, they will go in the slightly softer necks so may work fine.

I am using the older cases for the 1917 as it does not seem to care so much, have not had enough cycles in the newer cases ones to need to anneal.

I got a lot of 600 once fired RPs for 18 cents a case, adding a bunch of once fire RP range brass. Plan on getting the all prepped this winter (my brother has a Gerard trimmer setup for 30-06, so I don't hbave to hand trim with the Little Crow, we just do the whole lot in one easy go) and then shoot the whole summer (we shoot winter but neat nearly as much.)

I tend to shoot 50 or 75 yds as well. I think that result with irons sights is great, probably a 3/4 100 yd group if shooting a scope.

Plan on the fist group I shoot through the less capable Eddystone vs the Remington that shoots the 308s well (limitation being my eyes.

Will try on my Danish return, it’s a bit more worn, cool history going to Canada, to Denmark and then back to US (its got all the elements Ferris discusses in his 1917 book, neat to have one that fits it to a T like that)

[Ken in Iowa]

OK, we had a beautiful time at the range today. My test rounds were as follows;

FA57 GI Match cases- twice fired. CCI #200 primers. 46 gr IMR 4064. Hornady 174 gr .3105" (Actual .310") FMJBT

Test #1 .005" off the lands
Test #2 .025"
Test #3 .035"

I had goofed up on the seating die adjustment and did not load a batch at .015"

Test #1 was a bit odd. Group size was 1.8" with 2 shots in the same hole low and right from the other three. The two low shots were in the 10 ring.
Test #2 was nice. 4 of 5 shots grouped at .7" with 3 of them in the 10 ring. There was one high flyer that opened it up to 1.6".
Test #3 was all over the place. Group size was 3.4" in a vertical string.

I regret not having loaded .015" I suspect the optimal seating depth will be close to that number.

I know what the next test batch will be.

[RC20]

I may try a bit shorter on the next loadings. My 311s came in so have something to work with.
I am shooting 4350 exclusively so there may be powder preference in the spacing as well.

I think mine were .030 off the lands and I think closer was not doing so good, but that was also 308 diameter.

Never sure if the flyers are my eyes or something else!

Hope to get down next week. I had 1903 stuff loaded up, beautiful day let alone for Anchorage in October and the range was closed (Alaska day, aka former Seward day) drats, Not too many nice days left before snow flies and all too crisp!