Data for .215 gr Bullets in .303 British

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Art
    Senior Member, Deceased
    • Dec 2009
    • 9256

    #1

    Data for .215 gr Bullets in .303 British

    I was shopping and found that 215 gr Woodleigh bullets in .303 were available at a not bad price. I was thinking of buying some but have not been able to find any reloading data for 215 gr bullets in .303 British.

    I would be interested in powders/loads which would more or less duplicate the old .303 Brit. 215 gr. Remington or Dominion commercial loads. Some of you Canadians might be able to help with this.

    Thanks in advance.

    Art
    Last edited by Art; 05-13-2014, 06:04.
  • musketshooter
    Senior Member
    • Sep 2009
    • 521

    #2
    All the original 303 bullets I have checked are .310. I never had any good results with accuracy with oversized bullets.

    Comment

    • Parashooter
      Senior Member
      • Aug 2009
      • 819

      #3
      Originally posted by Art
      I was shopping and found that .215 gr Woodleigh bullets in .303 were available at a not bad price. I was thinking of buying some but have not been able to find any reloading data for .215 gr bullets in .303 British.
      It's no wonder you can't find data for bullets as light as .215-grain. What are they made of, helium?

      Comment

      • Tuna
        Senior Member
        • Aug 2009
        • 2686

        #4
        You might try about 41 gr. of 4350 for the 215 gr bullet. Should be in the ball park of 2050 fps which was the original loading in the .303.

        Comment

        • Art
          Senior Member, Deceased
          • Dec 2009
          • 9256

          #5
          Originally posted by Parashooter
          It's no wonder you can't find data for bullets as light as .215-grain. What are they made of, helium?
          Creeping senility I guess. Typos corrected, at least in the body of the post .
          Last edited by Art; 05-13-2014, 06:06.

          Comment

          • Art
            Senior Member, Deceased
            • Dec 2009
            • 9256

            #6
            Originally posted by Tuna
            You might try about 41 gr. of 4350 for the 215 gr bullet. Should be in the ball park of 2050 fps which was the original loading in the .303.
            Thanks much. If I find some IMR 4350 I'll buy the bullets and work up a load. I'll let you know how it comes out. If I get it done I'll try it out in our son's old Lee Enfield Sporter.
            Last edited by Art; 05-13-2014, 09:39.

            Comment

            • snakehunter
              Senior Member
              • Sep 2009
              • 773

              #7
              Originally posted by Art
              I was shopping and found that 215 gr Woodleigh bullets in .303 were available at a not bad price. I was thinking of buying some but have not been able to find any reloading data for 215 gr bullets in .303 British.

              I would be interested in powders/loads which would more or less duplicate the old .303 Brit. 215 gr. Remington or Dominion commercial loads. Some of you Canadians might be able to help with this.

              Thanks in advance.

              Art
              I've got an old Lyman manual that lists the factory duplication load for 215 grain jacketed bullets as 39.6 grains of IMR 4895 for a muzzle velocity of 2183 f/s out of a 25" barrel. The test rifle was an SMLE.

              Comment

              • emmagee1917
                Senior Member
                • Sep 2009
                • 1492

                #8

                page 39.
                Enjoy .
                Chris

                Comment

                • Art
                  Senior Member, Deceased
                  • Dec 2009
                  • 9256

                  #9
                  Originally posted by emmagee1917
                  What a great old manual!! Great "vast and unpaid research department" here, to quote Rush Limbaugh. It's interesting to me that the old manuals show loads that are "warmer," sometimes significantly "warmer" than the current ones. The load I use in my .250 savage came out of an old (late 60s maybe early 70s Sierra manual) and even then an acceptable load was hotter than the current manuals for that cartridge.

                  If I do this project I'll shoot for velocities between 2,000 and 2,100 FPS or so, in the unlikely event I'd ever find an appropriate opportunity hunt with it that should do the trick.

                  Thanks to all for the input.
                  Last edited by Art; 05-16-2014, 11:18.

                  Comment

                  • snakehunter
                    Senior Member
                    • Sep 2009
                    • 773

                    #10
                    Originally posted by Art
                    What a great old manual!! Great "vast and unpaid research department" here, to quote Rush Limbaugh. It's interesting to me that the old manuals show loads that are "warmer," sometimes significantly warmer than the current ones. The load I use in my .250 savage came out of an old (late 60s maybe early 70s Sierra manual) and even then an acceptable load was hotter than the current manuals for that cartridge.

                    If I do this project I'll shoot for velocities between 2,000 and 2,100 FPS or so, in the unlikely event I'd ever find an appropriate opportunity hunt with it that should do the trick.

                    Thanks to all for the input.
                    When I want to work up loads that take advantage of a weapons real potential, I always use the old manuals, unless the cartridge is too new to be in them. As you say, the old ones often have significantly hotter loads.

                    Comment

                    • emmagee1917
                      Senior Member
                      • Sep 2009
                      • 1492

                      #11
                      The old ones were written by ballisticians for reloaders with common sense enough to reduce and work up.
                      The new ones are written by lawyers who know common sense is no longer common.
                      Chris

                      Comment

                      • madsenshooter
                        Senior Member
                        • Aug 2009
                        • 1476

                        #12
                        I like that! Others have opined that today's data is down some because of improved pressure measuring methods. It's likely a bit of both. Working up for the rifle you're using is the key. More often that not today's data is developed in pressure test barrels that have minimal bore/groove dimensions vs, for example, a .314 groove diameter Enfield, or a .310 groove diameter Krag rifle.
                        "I have sworn upon the Altar of God, eternity hostility upon all forms of tyranny over the minds of man." - Thomas Jefferson

                        Comment

                        • Sunray
                          Senior Member
                          • Sep 2009
                          • 3251

                          #13
                          215's were only used until 1910 in Mk VI ammo. Also used for eons by moose hunters.
                          This is out of my old 45th Edition Lyman book published when 215's were still made by more than just Woodleigh. No idea what Rx 21 is though. Very likely not an issue.
                          Powder Start Vel Max Vel
                          IMR3031 32.0 1840 36.0 2057
                          IMR4064 35.0 1689 39.0 1996
                          IMR4895 36.0 2000 40.0 2217
                          IMR4320 37.0 2008 41.0 2217
                          Rx 37.0 2044 40.0* 2164
                          H380 40.0 2028 43.0 2150

                          Accuracy Load: IMR4895 39.5 grains 2183 fps
                          Factory Duplication Load: IMR4895 39.6 grains 2188 fps.
                          '*' indicates a compressed load.
                          Last edited by Sunray; 06-03-2014, 11:24.
                          Spelling and grammar count!

                          Comment

                          Working...