Jack O'Connor's .270 Winchester load. - Page 2

hooligan1 · February 7, 2015, 10:21 AM

David if I can get past 60 grains with no signs of pressure and it produces half moa groups at 100, then by all means there will be a good chance to see some dead deer....I shot my big tenpointer with my 7mm rem mag, and the shot and bullet performance was Golden,,,,,I liked it a lot, so Another rifle juggling act will happen.....maybe..

BumbleBug · February 7, 2015, 11:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stagpanther

Serious question--any notable difference between the IMR and Hodgdon 4831's (haven't tried the H)?

Back before Hodgdon acquired IMR the general consensus was that IMR48341 was slightly faster than H4831 & load a slightly reduced amount. As of today, perhaps Hodgdon put the same powder in different cans...LOL

...bug

Sure Shot Mc Gee · February 7, 2015, 12:38 PM

CAUTION: The following post includes loading data beyond or not covered by currently published maximums for this cartridge. USE AT YOUR OWN RISK. Neither the writer, The Firing Line, nor the staff of TFL assume any liability for any damage or injury resulting from use of this information.

62 grs That's a who~le lot'a 4831. I don't think your going to get it all in. If that is O Connor's Pet. I would have liked to have been there to see him squeeze that one together._

Pathfinder45 · February 7, 2015, 01:19 PM

I like for my hot loads to be a grain of powder or two below what I call the red-line. But the only way to know where that is, is to go there and find it. Ball powders, from what little I understand, tend to be more erratic at maximum pressures. I have had some unexpected results from H-450, for example. So I avoid spherical/ball powders for upper level loads. They do throw more consistently from a powder measure when you don't want to be bothered with weighing every charge, though.
But when you're dancing on the red-line, as I said before, use an extruded, stick-type powder, preferably single-base powder. Carefully weigh and trickle every charge to an exact weight for each test batch. Label everything and take careful notes. The ambient temperature can result in variable pressures.You might want to use Hodgdon Extreme propellants for that reason.

stagpanther · February 7, 2015, 01:20 PM

Hey sure shot--aren't you over on the the savage shooters forum also? I see a few familiar names that pop up here every now and then. : )

@bug--thanks for that. I have plenty of IMR and was wondering if there was any reason to get the H instead.

oldscot3 · February 7, 2015, 03:02 PM

I didn't mean to hurt your feelings hooligan, I just thought the pinecone comment was funny.

Yes, I read the article also. What I took away from it is that it is impossible to "duplicate" O'Conner's load today. The powder is different and brass is different, other variables may come into play as well.

That said, you may well come up with a very close load. If that meets a need you have or just makes you happy, I'm fine with that. I hope you stay safe and also think of the safety of others who may be nearby

Sure Shot Mc Gee · February 7, 2015, 03:24 PM

stagpanther

Nope not me. Here & Cast Boolits and one other.

Jimro · February 7, 2015, 03:37 PM

Jack O'Connor's reloading scale always did read a few grains heavy...

As always, do a load workup from a starting charge, and do not exceed the manufacturer listed max charge.

Jimro

DAVID NANCARROW · February 7, 2015, 03:38 PM

Hooligan1, turns out it was a very accurate load for my friend's rifle. We stepped it up in increments and got to 59 grains of the H4831 SC, which seems to pack a bit better than the regular cut H4831. Outstanding accuracy from that powder and 130 to 150 grain bullets. It was the "go to" powder.

T. O'Heir · February 7, 2015, 03:48 PM

"...that O'Conners scale was off by three grains..." Powders aren't the same now as they were in 1953 either. What is a max load now may not have been then. In any case, manual data reflect conditions with the firearm used on the day of the test only. A few grains plus or minus isn't unusual.
"...difference between the IMR and Hodgdon 4831's..." Less than 100 FPS with the 'H' having a very, very small advantage with a bit more powder required. So close they squeak.

hooligan1 · February 7, 2015, 04:16 PM

Oldscot I dont have any feelings to hurt, no harm no foul.
I did shoot the 60 grain test and wasnt happy with precision, no signs of pressure anywhere.

At the end of the day this old rifle needs a new barrel because it wouldnt even shoot its favorite load anywhere close to the way it used to, its lost over .030 in throat since Ive owned it which staggers me, I wouldn't have thought I shot that much....damnit.

reynolds357 · February 7, 2015, 04:21 PM

Hooligan, it is not too awfully hard to shoot out a .270 Winchester. It does not have a reputation for a burner, but the rifle is definitely much more overbore than it is typically given credit for. Give your rifle a new Lilja barrel for her birthday.

jimbob86 · February 7, 2015, 05:17 PM

Quote:

Hooligan, it is not too awfully hard to shoot out a .270 Winchester. It does not have a reputation for a burner, but the rifle is definitely much more overbore than it is typically given credit for.

It does not have the barrel burner rep because most .270's are used as big game hunting rifles, and might see 100 rounds trhough the tube in a year, if that ...... Target shooters will do that in a single match or practice session.

hooligan1 · February 7, 2015, 05:50 PM

I dont think anymore than 500 rnds since I owned it but as a second owner, I measured all BTO's of every bullet I load for it, and .030 or just a tad more, I think a new barrel will make me happy probably.

reynolds357 · February 7, 2015, 10:14 PM

Jimbob, the .264 Win mag. got a rep in the hunting community as a burner. It was used some for long range competition, but most of the people who will tell you "The .264 Win. Mag. is a barrel burner." never shot it in competition.

Mike / Tx · February 8, 2015, 05:57 AM

hooligan1,

I mentioned above that I was not a real fan of this load. That said it doesn't mean I haven't loaded up some pretty snappy loads over the eyars for my .270. I have also read a TON of writings by the man himself and as usual I take things with a grain of salt. I just never saw the need to push things into that catagory of load for the areas I hunt where shots are usually 50 - 200yds.

I as well as others here have no idea what background you an anyone else who reads this might have with working up loads so we like to, "remind" for lack of a better term, that sometimes things that "once were" are just that, once upon a time. There are loads from quite a few folks who get brought up nowadays in which newer testing equipment has put the halt on. That isn't to say it CAN'T be done, but it is simply not something that Joey who just got his first rifle and loading set up is needing to do.

As for the neighbor that loaded and used this load, yes even he found that while it did shoot very accurately, after a couple of loads the primers simply wouldn't stay put. Between that and ruining some really good meat more than once, he also dropped it down to around 58'ish grains.

Just keeping things somewhat safe for ALL who read this.

cdoc42 · February 8, 2015, 06:08 PM

Re: Stagpanther & BumbleBug's entries on the difference between H4831 and IMR4831, I got on board tonight specifically to ask that question. I apologize if this tends to steal the thread but I looking at data for a .300 Win Short Mag load, and current data in the Hodgdon Web site lists:

H4831 MAX 70.0C 2929 fps with 64,000 PSI

IMR 4831 MAX 66.3C 2980 fps with 62,900 PSI

My choice obviously would be IMR. This gives me the impression they are still not the same powder in those cannisters.

stagpanther · February 8, 2015, 06:26 PM

interesting...and here's a timely piece http://kwk.us/chronographs.html

gman3 · February 8, 2015, 08:48 PM

Was that a green pine cone, or a brown pine cone? There is a huge difference.

steveno · February 9, 2015, 03:10 AM

H4831 is a slower burning powder than IMR4831.

jimbob86 · February 9, 2015, 08:01 AM

Quote:

If Jack wiped his butt with a pinecone, would you want to duplicate that too?

If it worked as well for the task at hand as Jack's .270WIN load apparently did, I might try it, given similar materials and conditions to work with.

Sadly, those don't exist. The milsurp powder is gone, replaced by an apparently faster commercial version. Gone too, are the huge unpressured bucks living on accessable ground ....... relics of the middle of last century. There are big bucks out there, but they are harder to find, and won't stand there and look at you, waiting for a photo op..... most of those that are not pressured to the point of paranoid schitzophrenia are on leases that J.Q. Public will never afford.

"The Past is another Country. They do things differently there."

stagpanther · February 9, 2015, 08:37 AM

Deer are just smarter these days. : ) Had an enormous 8 pointer walk right up to me at my house this season when I called him in--unfortunately deer hunting is banned in town where I live. My friend down the street suggested the next time a deer gets that close to my front door I should try inviting him in.

jimbob86 · February 9, 2015, 08:42 AM

Quote:

Had an enormous 8 pointer walk right up to me at my house this season when I called him in--unfortunately deer hunting is banned in town where I live.

Exactly: That deer is unpressured because he is inaccessable to hunters.

Pathfinder45 · February 9, 2015, 10:13 PM

Keep in mind, there are two kinds of shooters that use chronographs:
1) Those who have shot their chronograph.
2) Those who will.
Which one are you?

jimbob86 · February 9, 2015, 10:23 PM

Quote:

Keep in mind, there are two kinds of shooters that use chronographs:
1) Those who have shot their chronograph.
2) Those who will.
Which one are you?

I falll into the first category.

What caliber for Chrony?

.45ACP - 230gr Ranier Ballistics plated HP @ abot 850 f/sec works pretty well......

February 7, 2015, 10:21 AM	#26
hooligan1 Senior Member Join Date: July 18, 2010 Location: Independence Missouri Posts: 4,585	David if I can get past 60 grains with no signs of pressure and it produces half moa groups at 100, then by all means there will be a good chance to see some dead deer....I shot my big tenpointer with my 7mm rem mag, and the shot and bullet performance was Golden,,,,,I liked it a lot, so Another rifle juggling act will happen.....maybe.. __________________ Keep your Axe sharp and your powder dry.

February 7, 2015, 03:37 PM	#33
Jimro Senior Member Join Date: October 18, 2006 Posts: 7,097	Jack O'Connor's reloading scale always did read a few grains heavy... As always, do a load workup from a starting charge, and do not exceed the manufacturer listed max charge. Jimro __________________ Machine guns are awesome until you have to carry one.

February 7, 2015, 03:48 PM	#35
T. O'Heir Senior Member Join Date: February 13, 2002 Location: Canada Posts: 12,453	"...that O'Conners scale was off by three grains..." Powders aren't the same now as they were in 1953 either. What is a max load now may not have been then. In any case, manual data reflect conditions with the firearm used on the day of the test only. A few grains plus or minus isn't unusual. "...difference between the IMR and Hodgdon 4831's..." Less than 100 FPS with the 'H' having a very, very small advantage with a bit more powder required. So close they squeak. __________________ Spelling and grammar count!

February 7, 2015, 04:16 PM	#36
hooligan1 Senior Member Join Date: July 18, 2010 Location: Independence Missouri Posts: 4,585	Oldscot I dont have any feelings to hurt, no harm no foul. I did shoot the 60 grain test and wasnt happy with precision, no signs of pressure anywhere. At the end of the day this old rifle needs a new barrel because it wouldnt even shoot its favorite load anywhere close to the way it used to, its lost over .030 in throat since Ive owned it which staggers me, I wouldn't have thought I shot that much....damnit. __________________ Keep your Axe sharp and your powder dry.

February 7, 2015, 05:50 PM	#39
hooligan1 Senior Member Join Date: July 18, 2010 Location: Independence Missouri Posts: 4,585	I dont think anymore than 500 rnds since I owned it but as a second owner, I measured all BTO's of every bullet I load for it, and .030 or just a tad more, I think a new barrel will make me happy probably. __________________ Keep your Axe sharp and your powder dry.

February 7, 2015, 12:38 PM	#28
Sure Shot Mc Gee Senior Member Join Date: January 2, 2012 Location: Minnesota Posts: 3,876	CAUTION: The following post includes loading data beyond or not covered by currently published maximums for this cartridge. USE AT YOUR OWN RISK. Neither the writer, The Firing Line, nor the staff of TFL assume any liability for any damage or injury resulting from use of this information. 62 grs That's a who~le lot'a 4831. I don't think your going to get it all in. If that is O Connor's Pet. I would have liked to have been there to see him squeeze that one together._

February 7, 2015, 01:19 PM	#29
Pathfinder45 Senior Member Join Date: January 7, 2008 Posts: 3,224	I like for my hot loads to be a grain of powder or two below what I call the red-line. But the only way to know where that is, is to go there and find it. Ball powders, from what little I understand, tend to be more erratic at maximum pressures. I have had some unexpected results from H-450, for example. So I avoid spherical/ball powders for upper level loads. They do throw more consistently from a powder measure when you don't want to be bothered with weighing every charge, though. But when you're dancing on the red-line, as I said before, use an extruded, stick-type powder, preferably single-base powder. Carefully weigh and trickle every charge to an exact weight for each test batch. Label everything and take careful notes. The ambient temperature can result in variable pressures.You might want to use Hodgdon Extreme propellants for that reason.

February 7, 2015, 01:20 PM	#30
stagpanther Senior Member Join Date: March 2, 2014 Posts: 11,772	Hey sure shot--aren't you over on the the savage shooters forum also? I see a few familiar names that pop up here every now and then. : ) @bug--thanks for that. I have plenty of IMR and was wondering if there was any reason to get the H instead.

February 7, 2015, 03:02 PM	#31
oldscot3 Senior Member Join Date: July 1, 2007 Location: texas Posts: 997	I didn't mean to hurt your feelings hooligan, I just thought the pinecone comment was funny. Yes, I read the article also. What I took away from it is that it is impossible to "duplicate" O'Conner's load today. The powder is different and brass is different, other variables may come into play as well. That said, you may well come up with a very close load. If that meets a need you have or just makes you happy, I'm fine with that. I hope you stay safe and also think of the safety of others who may be nearby

February 7, 2015, 03:24 PM	#32
Sure Shot Mc Gee Senior Member Join Date: January 2, 2012 Location: Minnesota Posts: 3,876	stagpanther Nope not me. Here & Cast Boolits and one other.

February 7, 2015, 03:38 PM	#34
DAVID NANCARROW Senior Member Join Date: November 5, 2000 Location: Wyoming Posts: 1,761	Hooligan1, turns out it was a very accurate load for my friend's rifle. We stepped it up in increments and got to 59 grains of the H4831 SC, which seems to pack a bit better than the regular cut H4831. Outstanding accuracy from that powder and 130 to 150 grain bullets. It was the "go to" powder.

February 7, 2015, 04:21 PM	#37
reynolds357 Senior Member Join Date: December 10, 2012 Posts: 6,165	Hooligan, it is not too awfully hard to shoot out a .270 Winchester. It does not have a reputation for a burner, but the rifle is definitely much more overbore than it is typically given credit for. Give your rifle a new Lilja barrel for her birthday.

February 7, 2015, 10:14 PM	#40
reynolds357 Senior Member Join Date: December 10, 2012 Posts: 6,165	Jimbob, the .264 Win mag. got a rep in the hunting community as a burner. It was used some for long range competition, but most of the people who will tell you "The .264 Win. Mag. is a barrel burner." never shot it in competition.

February 8, 2015, 05:57 AM	#41
Mike / Tx Senior Member Join Date: April 8, 2000 Posts: 2,101	hooligan1, I mentioned above that I was not a real fan of this load. That said it doesn't mean I haven't loaded up some pretty snappy loads over the eyars for my .270. I have also read a TON of writings by the man himself and as usual I take things with a grain of salt. I just never saw the need to push things into that catagory of load for the areas I hunt where shots are usually 50 - 200yds. I as well as others here have no idea what background you an anyone else who reads this might have with working up loads so we like to, "remind" for lack of a better term, that sometimes things that "once were" are just that, once upon a time. There are loads from quite a few folks who get brought up nowadays in which newer testing equipment has put the halt on. That isn't to say it CAN'T be done, but it is simply not something that Joey who just got his first rifle and loading set up is needing to do. As for the neighbor that loaded and used this load, yes even he found that while it did shoot very accurately, after a couple of loads the primers simply wouldn't stay put. Between that and ruining some really good meat more than once, he also dropped it down to around 58'ish grains. Just keeping things somewhat safe for ALL who read this. __________________ LAter, Mike / TX

February 8, 2015, 06:08 PM	#42
cdoc42 Senior Member Join Date: March 13, 2005 Location: Pennsylvania Posts: 1,687	Re: Stagpanther & BumbleBug's entries on the difference between H4831 and IMR4831, I got on board tonight specifically to ask that question. I apologize if this tends to steal the thread but I looking at data for a .300 Win Short Mag load, and current data in the Hodgdon Web site lists: H4831 MAX 70.0C 2929 fps with 64,000 PSI IMR 4831 MAX 66.3C 2980 fps with 62,900 PSI My choice obviously would be IMR. This gives me the impression they are still not the same powder in those cannisters.

February 8, 2015, 06:26 PM	#43
stagpanther Senior Member Join Date: March 2, 2014 Posts: 11,772	interesting...and here's a timely piece http://kwk.us/chronographs.html

February 8, 2015, 08:48 PM	#44
gman3 Senior Member Join Date: December 19, 2008 Posts: 408	Was that a green pine cone, or a brown pine cone? There is a huge difference.

February 9, 2015, 03:10 AM	#45
steveno Senior Member Join Date: June 18, 2004 Location: Minden , Nebraska Posts: 1,407	H4831 is a slower burning powder than IMR4831.

February 9, 2015, 08:37 AM	#47
stagpanther Senior Member Join Date: March 2, 2014 Posts: 11,772	Deer are just smarter these days. : ) Had an enormous 8 pointer walk right up to me at my house this season when I called him in--unfortunately deer hunting is banned in town where I live. My friend down the street suggested the next time a deer gets that close to my front door I should try inviting him in.

February 9, 2015, 10:13 PM	#49
Pathfinder45 Senior Member Join Date: January 7, 2008 Posts: 3,224	About Chronographs.... Keep in mind, there are two kinds of shooters that use chronographs: 1) Those who have shot their chronograph. 2) Those who will. Which one are you?