25-35 loads

Finally got the software out the door late last night... so, assuming one doesn't get clobbered by another oak tree and the car's willing: we should be able to post the last 6 powders for the 86gr sp this afternoon. (after this addition, if anyone can make a strong case for adding additional powders, we'll add them; but otherwise, then we'll be onto the pointy'er bullets (75gr vmax, 75gr hp etc)). Now time to get the range kit into the car...

do shoot straight,
greg
www.gmdr.com

Got to the range, got the data... and the pages the above links point to have been updated (powders added: H414, H4895, aa2460, H380, H4227). (We also took the upper branch of vvn120 data, 16-20gr - but given we had run out of the old single groove bullets and ended up using the new 2 groover's (only use in the collection of data) - and since this is essentially a difference bullet, we left that data out: why mix apples and oranges).

Again: general comments -

- the bullet is the limiting factor w/re groupsizes - it's a good mule for taking data, but it's not up to what the gun can/should be able to deliver (1 MOAish). Probably a great bullet for the 1930's, still a good hunting bullet... but not a benchrest bullet (and now with the two crimp grooves, even less so).

- the top i3031 and i4320 loads, at least in this Marlin, are more than the gun wants (which we find a bit surprising in that they're both standard industry top 86gr loads from yesteryear). The rest of the loads we'd happily reshoot (in terms of pressure). These loads didn't blow anything up, but we were left with the impression they were at the gun's limit (which is never a comfortable place to be).

- finally lost a piece of brass (of the original 300) - in loading for this range trip, found that in the previous data taking one of the loads had split a neck (looks to be from work hardening vs over pressure). 7 reloadings isn't up to the 20 and 30 we see in CAS 4570 loads, but isn't unacceptable given the intensity of the loads being shot.

- in looking over the brass: after 7 firings, the case stretch is running btwn .003 and .005" - before we take the vmax data, we'll trim them all back to saami std length to standardize the cases. At least as of this last reloading: all primer pockets are nicely tight.

do shoot straight,
greg
www.gmdr.com

ps. more detailed comments on the data to follow - need some beard scratching time to put 'em together.

A more detailed exposition of what we did, why, and what we saw.


How we got to the loads we chose to shoot..

Or said differently: how does one go about developing/testing loads for a cartridge for which the most recent data is 40-50 years out of date? Our answer is to find what data is available, shoot it, get a sense of what max pressure looks like, and then carefully extrapolate from there to the more modern powders.

We were able to come up with 1205 loads from the old Ideal manuals (1924-1950), Sharpe (1939), Belding&Mull (1949), and some semi-modern data (hornady, hodgdon and handloaders). (We even found a couple of loads in the VV3 manual.) Of the data we found, more than half was for powders which don't exist today... but out of what was left was enough to get started. This provided the starting spot.

Over and above the old 25-35 data, we also rounded up 1300ish 250 savage loads... as vetting device for the 25-35 data, ie, the 250 data should always be n grains or n % heavier than the like 25-35 load. The 250 data can't be used directly for reloading, but can be use to keep one from loading a 25-35 round which they'd rather not shoot.

Ackley data was also included in the collection, but generally as a upper upper limit of what loads were acceptable (generally find Ackley data to be very hot - he came from the school that: if one can get the action open with a 3lb sledge it's ok, if it takes a 5lb'er then it's too hot - in our book: having to use the 3 lb'er means the load is too hot.)

Additionally, in order to keep a sense of what pressures we were operating at, we found older data with pressures. The assumption being that: if a simple extruded grain produces x velocity with y pressure, more modern, more "degressive" powders should be able either reach a) the same velocity at a lower pressure, or b) a higher velocity at the same pressure. (Remember when Varget first came out and people were impressed with the velocities they could reach, without going over pressure...)

Beyond that, we also relied on the fact that the 25-35 had a good 50 year run, and although the data is dated, a consensus generally had been reached in terms of what was acceptable (in terms of pressure) and what was over pressure. We used those accepted max loads as our upper pressure landmarks... (and since we were using a 1:16 barrel, and the data was taken as "should be safe" in a 1:8 barrel, we took such as a little buffer in terms of pressure, ie, what's safe in a 1:8 should generate even lower pressure in a 1:16 (using the two IBPs we have access to: one suggests a 2600 CUP reduction in pressure, the other 4000 CUP)).

To make use of data for powders for which there was no data explicitly for a 86 or 87gr bullet, but was data for 60's, 75's and heavier, by plotting the data as acceptable PWs as a function of BW, one can interpolate the missing data.


Why the 86gr Rem Softpoint to start with?

A couple of reasons: 1) we've have had quite a bit experience with the bullet in taking 25-20 data and 256 win mag data; and 2) for a first bullet for a new cartridge (in terms of data taking), why waste good money launching premium bullets, especially if one doesn't know if the loads will be worthwhile or not, ie, start with the bulk bullets, and then move to the Bergers etc. The previous experience is important in knowing how to judge a new cartridge, eg, a bullet that shoots .5 MOA in several cartridges, but in a test cartridge shoots 2 MOA - then one might know to start looking for a ballistics problem - without that knowledge it's harder to know what's a problem and what's "that's just the way it is".

Of note: the 86gr SP's we used were from the mid-1990's, ie, they were still with only the single crimp groove (positioned to make a 1.600 oal in a 25-20... since they were 25-20 bullets). As we got to the end of the data taking we were running short on bullets (after all these years - had been running on this stock of bullets for a decade) so ordered up a 1000 from Midway... only to discover that Rem has added a 2nd groove. Instead of mixing bullets within the data, we cut the 86gr data taking short. We have taken some data using the 2 groover, but are generally impressed that they are a lesser bullet, with a lower BC (likewise, they seem to seal less well generating less velocity for the same pressure).


More on the firearm and the reloading process...

We're written on this above, but to make sure all the info is in one place for others reading the thread:
The firearm is a Marlin m375 which has had the 375 barrel removed and had a 1894cl 25-20 barrel fitted. The 25-20 barrel had been reamed to 25-35 win (much like we did for the 256 win mag data taking). This means the twist rate is that of a 25-20, or, 1:16 twist (vs 1:8 thru 1:10 for a "real" 25-35).

Although the targets are formally chrono backing targets, given that we're all target shooters around here, the group sizes are representative - probably somewhat better than what a hunter would see in the field, likewise, probably somewhat worse than what a full-on benchrest type would see. The targets were shot at 50 yrds, the groups are for 10 shots. A front rest was used, but not a rear. The scope is one of our trusty bsa 24x BR scopes.

The brass is from a box of 500 from the 90's. After each range session, the brass was inspected and then in bulk tumbled, and likewise stored. When brass was needed for reloading pieces were picked at random from the storage boxes, ie, brass was not cherry picked. The die set used was rcbs'd std 25-35 fl dies set, ie, not their cowboy dies. Other than the i3031, i4064 and i4350 all loads were thrown; the above were weighed. Before throwing a load, the uniflow (powder measure) was calibrated to +/- .02gr (or better - done by throwing 10 loads and buying that extra digit on the scale). Most of the powders are a year or less old (powder doesn't last long around here). All powders (and primers) are stored in 54-58degF magazines. The brass hasn't been trimmed, either initially, or since. Primer pockets haven't been cleaned. Of the orignial 300 cases we lost one to a split neck after the previous round of data taking; and in checking the brass from the last data taking we lost another (split neck, from 15gr h4227 load, ie, a moderate load, not a max load).

The data was taken at the temperatures indicated, all loads were heatsoaked for 30min-2hrs at temp before they were shot. The temperature range across the data was kept so 10degs +/- (so one can compare apple and apples). One should/would very much expect the temperature sensitive powders to generate significantly more velocity and pressure if shot on a hot summer day, ie, what we perceived as max loads at 50degF, could be well over the top at 110degF. The range is at 1800ft, the RH is nominally dry; winds were near calm (at much over 5mph we pack). The data was taken with an Advantage Automation lab chrono; data was collected in real-time via AtTheRange; data was stored in rcbs.load v3.20, graphics produced from there.


W/re Bullet Seating Depth

In looking at the historic data, the 86gr SP is nominally seated so as to make a 2.530" oal cartridge. Our chamber won't accept such high seating (if we put a bullet in the mouth of a fired case and close it in the action, the resulting oal is 2.480"). We went with 2.450" as an oal, giving .030" bullet jump to the rifling. This also gave us a 1.7 caliber seating, or, significant bullet tension, or hopefully, an aid to better ignition/combustion. Seating at the 2nd crimp groove gives a .100 to .150" BSD (ie, .5 caliber or less). Since such a round wouldn't chamber, we didn't try any.


What we saw, in general

- We came away impressed with the 25-35. Although we don't see it as a replacement for the 30-30 and its 170gr bullet, the powder capacity of the 30-30 (aka 25-35) seems to be a better match for 75-90 gr bullet and the resulting trajectories. (the 307win is to the 170gr .308" bullet as the 25-35 is to the 86gr'er.)

- For the slower powders tested, the full case or near full case loads performed well; the lighter loads for the same powders exhibited significant ballistics instability (read: incipient detonation) and other than for doing interior ballistics research should be avoided. RL10 and Benchmark are especially worth noting.

- The slowest pistol/fastest rifle powders did quite well (if one didn't push them too hard). This is where we'd look for target loads. LilGun continues to impress, ie, haven't found a cartridge yet for which it didn't work well. The vvn120, h4227 and even h2400 did more than acceptably well.

- We weren't impressed by the generated pressures... with the exception of the max i3031 and i4320 loads (although they're (were) very standard industry max loads, even given the reduced pressure of the 1:16 barrel, given the primer shape/flow, we'd rather not shoot them again in our firearm (especially given that the same velocities can be reached via other powders, which don't exhibit the same apparent pressures)). Case stretch after the 7 or 8 reloadings runs .004 - 006".

- The median groupsize (10 shots, 50yrds) runs 1.5" (quite usable for hunting, and not bad given the bulk nature of the bullets). The median ES was 70fps, the median SD 25fps (not bad for 27 powders).


What we saw, powder by powder

AA2015
2 groupsizes (of the 5 shot) less than median groupsize for all 86gr groups - 1.29" smallest, 1.81" largest. 2 SDs (of velocity) better than median (25fps). Slightly faster than i3031, should be able to move up to 29+ grains. Not a bad powder, just not the best.

AA2460
2 GS < median, 1.20"-1.71", 1 SD < median. Being a ball powder, meters well. 28gr load well short of 30gr 3031 pressure, max may move up to 29 or 30gr - but being a ball powder, can't be compressed. Another ok powder.

AA2520
3 GS < median, .95"-2.7", 1 SD < median. Slightly faster than i4064, max should be able to move up to 29+ grains (being ball, never compress). A maybe ok powder - but didn't like the ballistic instabilities exhibited.

BLC2
3 GS < median, 1.25"-1.70", 0 SD < median. As a ball powder meters well (hey - had to say something good about it). Slower than i4046, runs out of case long before pressure.

Benchmark
3 GS < median, .96"-1.82", 0 SD < median (that's a surprise). Meters well. One of our powders of choice. Slightly slower than i3031, runs out of pressure and capacity simultaneously, ie, spot on correct RQ for the application. A modern i3031?

H2400
4 GS < median, 1.00"-1.72", 4 SD < median. Meters ok, performed better than expected, still 2nd or 3rd choice to LilGun or H4227 for target use. 16gr listed as max load in historic manuals, but in fact seems quit a bit short of max.

H322
1 GS < median, 1.32"-3.2", 3 SD < median. Meters well, should be a powder of choice if it shot better.
A little faster than 3031, runs out of pressure before case.

H335
0 GS < median, 1.57"-2.2", 2 SD < median. A ball powder which meters well (again, had to say something positive). Half way btwn 3031 and 4064 in speed.

H380
0 GS < median, 1.56"-2.6", 2 SD < median. As a ball powder meters well. Runs out of case capacity long before pressure - btwn i4350 and i4064.

H414
1 GS < median, 1.41"-2.2", 1 SD < median. As a ball powder meters well. Runs out of case long before pressure.

H4198
3 GS < median, 1.07"-1.79", 4 SD < median. Meters "ok". RL7, VVN130 class; good ignition, will look to for the lighter bullets later.

H4227
3 GS < median, 1.18"-1.89", 5 SD < median!! Meters well. VVN120 class, very good stats, should shoot better - will look to for forthcoming lighter bullets. A choice for low velocity loads.

H4895
1 GS < median, 1.23"-1.90", 2 SD < median. Meters more or less (but better then IMR). Not a great shooter (again, better than IMR) - just runs out of case before pressure.

IMR3031
2 GS < median, 1.21"-2.7", 1 SD < median. Doesn't meter! 30 grains long standing industry standard max load (which is slightly compressed with a 2.450 oal). Showed very real signs of trying to detonate with 24gr load. Loads less than 26gr not ballistically stable! One of the first powders which allowed the 25-35 to perform (1934). Runs out of pressure and case simultaneously. Right RQ for application, wrong powder. 30 gr load, although standard max load, is too hot by our taste.

IMR4064
0 GS < median, 1.92"-2.5", 2 SD < median. Doesn't meter! 31 grains another industry standard max load. For the 86gr bullet, runs out of space before pressure. Long used as a 25-35 powder.

IMR4320
2 GS < median, 1.23"-2.4", 2 SD < median. Kind of meters. Another long used 25-35 powder. Runs out of space before pressure. 32gr load is too hot by our taste.

IMR4350
1 GS < median, 1.48"-2.4", 0 SD < median. Does not meter! 32gr load slightly compressed. Runs out of case long before pressure. Generates lots of partially burned grains.

IMR4895
1 GS < median, 1.27"-2.6", 1 sd < median. Meters poorly. Runs out of case before pressure. Possible detonation with 25gr load (117fps SD, 337fps ES). With H4895 available, why bother.

Lil'Gun
4 GS < median, .61"-1.76", 5 sd < median!! Meters well.Probably THE target load powder for the 25-35. 16gr load is probably at max. Won't set speed records, but at reduced velocities: one of the finest shooters. Amazingly ballistically stable even with light loads. Makes the 25-35 into a very accurate 25-20 (w/ the 25-20 std bullet)

RL10x
5 GS < median, .83"-1.49", 3 SD < median!! Meters well. High velocity accuracy champion. Runs out of pressure before capacity, by a little; slightly faster than AA2015. Very clearly THE powder of choice (for the application) - fine statistics, fine shooting.

RL7
3 GS < median, 1.45"-1.98", 5 SD < median. Meters ok. In the VVN130, H4198 class - 2nd choice to H4198, better than 130. Did better than expected.

Varget
2 GS < median, 1.09"-2.29", 2 SD < median. Meters ok. In 4064, 4320 class, an also ran.

VVN120
4 GS < median, .82"-1.65", 5 SD < median!! Meters ok. Very stable even in light loads. A fine shooter. Will be revisited for the lighter bullets.

VVN130
1 GS < median, 1.45"-2.6", 4 SD < median. Meters ok. Stats better than average, but shot less well than median GS?? In H4198, RL7 class (where either is a better choice).

VVN133
1 GS < median, 1.21"-2.2", 1 SD < median. Meters ok. AA2015, H322 class, average shooter, average stats.

VVN135
4 GS < median, 1.29"-1.56", 3 SD < median. Meters ok. Max load might to to 30gr. Slightly runs out of pressure before capacity. H322 class (but performs better).

VVN140
1 gs < median, 1.10"-2.0", 3 SD < median. Meters kind of ok. 4320, Varget, 4064 class powder - runs out of case long before pressure.


Where to from here...

We still have lead bullet data to take (77gr 257420's) - probably will do 30ish powders, velocities will be in the 1100-1600 fps range. In the jacketed bullets, we'll take a subset of the 86gr powders and take data for Speer's 75gr FNC (in our experience, a target version of the 86gr Rem), likewise, hornady's 75gr Vmax and Sierra's 75gr HP. We may try some 60gr hornady FPs, but given previous experience (called: why bother) - we may take only a few powders.

After that the question is: which 25-35 Improved to stepup to: ackley's 28deg or 40deg Improved? or a Tomcat? The other question would be: continue to take data with the short 22" 25-20 barrel, or really try to milk the cartridge for all the velocity we can (think: flatter shooting varmint use), and chamber the improved in a 26 or 27" #7 or #8 contour target barrel (but again, on the same m375 receiver). Choices, choices...


do shoot straight,
greg
www.gmdr.com

ps. the data pointed to by the link in our previous posts will added to the "Additional Data" collection on our website (as time permits - taking more data comes first).

SMK -

Interesting (especially since there's a 25-35 Improved in our near future). Question: what type of loads were/are you using to fireform from-the-box 25-35 win brass? Did you have time to twiddle the loads and see if the loss rate could be reduced? Curious minds have got to know... especially since we're going to have to make up 300-400 pieces not too far down the road.

thanks... and do shoot straight,
greg
www.gmdr.com

ps. do you have access to one (or more) CNC mills/lathes? Likewise any interest in automatic generation of G-code/M-code programs to produce forming/loading dies and/or chamber reamers? Let's take this to PM or email.

Greg,
At first I tried a real small charge of bullseye (4gr maybe? I don't remember) with cream of wheat in the basement just to see if I could get any good ones and it worked. I then loaded 10 gr of sr4759 behind ancient 87 gr sierra's I inherited and this worked fine, but the shoulders were rounded quite a bit. I then went to 12 gr of sr4759, same bullet. These formed a little sharper, velocity is around 1600. If you want really sharp shoulders you may want to go more, but I don't know if this will increase fallout. I only had one failure out of 50 using this charge (maybe I didn't anneal one correctly) except for the 10 cases I tried without annealing of which 5 failed.

Sean

Dr. A said:

Greg, in reviewing Hodgden's data, it would appear that the pressures on a regular twist 25-35 are much greater with the likes of Benchmark in particular, and that if we used the dose you listed for 2800fps, it would be way over 40000 in pressure. I know you mentioned the rifling difference. Is it going to make that much difference? Do you know the pressure those top Benchmark loads are running out at? My experience with Benchmark (although limited), is that it always runs more accurately at higher pressures.

Also, BLC (2) data does not jive with yours at all. They were able to obtain much greater velocity safely. They also used much greater amounts of powder with it. Are you running low pressures on your BLC (2) data? Reviewing Hodgden's data, I am inclined to use this powder. In reviewing yours, Benchmark would be my pick (of what I can get and have).

Thanks for all the info.

Click to expand...

Dr A -

The top of the day to ya... let me see if I can't speak to your three concerns (which we share):

1) "they were able to use heavier loads" - I don't think they actually did; maybe they did, but don't see how. BLC(2) is a ball powder and doesn't tolerate compression. With the OAL we're running, or conversely, given the BSD we're using, there's only 29.1 or 29.2 gr of capacity (w/o compression) left. I don't know how much more they "used", but likewise, I'm not quite sure where they could have put it. We shot 29.0gr and thought it was very nearly a 100% density load [the 29.0gr loads didnt shake; the 27.5's one could hear the powder]. If they got significantly more powder in... I'm always for learning new tricks/tools/methods.

And to somewhat buttress said position: if one plots the published max BLC2 loads as a function of bullet weight www.gmdr.com/levern/2535blc2PWBW.jpg there's a nice quadratic fit to the top loads - 29 or 29.1 grains fits nicely for a 86 or 87 gr bullet (even if the fit is linear then 29.0 is only going to be .2 or .3 gr over the fit).

Yes, they might be able to squeeze a bit more in by going to a shorter BSD (bullet seating depth) - one can pickup 1.31gr per 0.100" one decreases the BSD - but one can only go so far that direction... ie, we take 29.0 as being within a few tenths of the actual physical max, if not max.

2) "they got more velocity" - actually I think not. Yes the published numbers are larger... but in all likelyhood, they're the wrong numbers. (This is in reference to the 2666 fps number in H23-H26, gone in H27.) This one had me going for a while, trying to understand why the difference.

If one looks at clean, normal data, one should see, as we referred to in the previous post: (assuming a PW vs V graph) - the lighest bullets with the heaviest loads go with the highest velocites, and conversely the heaviest bullets with the lightest loads go with the lowest velocities. Two examples of this would be: www.gmdr.com/levern/2535h4198pwv.jpg (hodgdon's 2535 data from h23-26), or www.gmdr.com/levern/250savBLC2pwv.jpg (hodgdon's 250 savage blc2 data, from h23-26) - (velocity as a function of powder weight graphs, PW in grains, V in fps). In other than pathological cases, this is what good data *should* look like - it's pure physics. I believe the problem with the 2666 number is: it doesn't fit with the above progression of powder weights, bullet weights and velocities. Hodgdon's H23-H26 86gr BLC(2) 25-35 data: www.gmdr.com/levern/2535blc2PWV.jpg If one takes the above as given (the progression/standard picture), and that 29gr is the max load for the 87gr bullet, then wouldn't the "87,j" trace top end be around 2550fps? Our data says 2530 fps. (quick digression: with 10 shot ES's in the 100+ fps range, what is the chance that by picking a 3 shot window (assuming they used 3 shots to establish values) one could see a 30fps higher value. Chrono screen from BLC2 data - lightest loads on left, max on right, velocity in fps www.gmdr.com/levern/2535-86grBLC2chronolog.jpg , in contrast (data where 3 shots might get on by), H4227 in same context: www.gmdr.com/levern/2535-86grH4227chronolog.jpg )

3)"Benchmark loads may be well over pressure, over 40k CUP" - the 29 gr load might be... but I suspect not. Of the loads we shot, the ones I'd like to turn the wick down on are: the max i3031 load, the max 4320, the max Varget load and the max RL10 load. The 3031 and 4320 loads just feel too hot. The Varget load didn't show any pressure signs, but 2850 is a lot of velocity for that cartridge, we'd probably back it down a grain. And again, the RL10 max load - didn't show any pressure signs, but 2800 fps with such a fast powder (for the application) - yes it's a well engineered powder, but physics is physics - we'd back the max down a grain (until we could prove the extra grain is within reason). Maybe the Benchmark max load is over max; but if it is, given its placement on the PW vs V graph, it's not by much (.5 gr??).

Of note: when we're done with the bulk of the 25-35 data taking, we'll go back take CHE data (using fresh brass etc) for various of the loads, BnchMrk included. We may not be able get absolute pressures, but we should be able to get a sense of the pressures for the unpublished data (based on velocities and pressures for published data). It should also be interesting to see if the "modern/advanced/engineered" powders do in fact generate more mv per CUP (by reshaping the time-pressure curve).

Your comments, please...

do shoot straight,
greg
www.gmdr.com

Dear readers of this thread -

Out of curiosity - this thread has what I would have called a disproportionate number of reads, ie, I didn't even think that many shooters even knew that the 25-35 exists or ever existed. I'm actually heartened by the read counts, ie, maybe the 25-35 has future. My question is: what is the level of involvement/interest in the 25-35 by those reading this thread? Looking to reload? Already own one? For historic reasons? Thinking about owning one? Curious minds have got to know... Many thanks.

do shoot straight,
greg
www.gmdr.com

Greg, I have two Marlin 1893's in 25-36. So, I like seeing the 25-35 loads as I don't cut the cases back as much to let it reach the 25-36 size by using them. Definately a plus to see your data.

I have a 25-35, and though I prefer Marlins, was heartened by Winchester offering a "Varmint caliber" for those of us with the current interest in lever actions. Interesting you mentioned that today, because I spent the day going after the prairie dogs. I took my 22 Hornet, my 22-250, and my 25-35. I connected easily with the former two, and though I struggled with the 25-35, it was mainly because of the limited range of the 4X scope. I did connect on several shots ranging out to 210 yards. The bullet is rather frangible, and the results were spectacular. Ran 50 round through it today with H4895 going about 2600fps. At this point, it looks like I could easily use a 4-12X scope on the thing.
Something else completely unrelated, is that my son (6 years old) connected with 5 prairie dogs! . Ranges 36 to 51 yards. He was shooting a 17HMR in a Marlin bolt action. I am one proud papa. (Just had to put my 2 cents in)

Range session cut a little short this morning due to mud and water. . No Benchmark loads shot. Will have to shoot those in the backyard.

86 grain Remington, 27.0 gr of IMR 3031. 2653fps E 49, SD 21. This loaded to 2.550" long, the bullet touching the rifling.

86 grain Remington IMR 4320 27.0 grains. 2266fps, E 49, SD 23 This one loaded to 2.489" oal to feed through the magazine..

117 gr Hornady Rd Nose with 24.0 gr of IMR 3031, 2217fps, E 37 and SD 18.This load does not appear to be maximum.

100 gr Nosler Partition was loaded with 29.0 gr of IMR 4320. 2531fps, E of 40 and SD of 19fps. This load is at lest one grain over maximum. I will measure the pressure rings and add that info. The primers exhibit just the beginning of the primer starting to flow back into the firing pin hole. The edges of the primer are not sharp and have not flowed out to the edges of the primer pocket. Still the signs clearly indicate this is maximum+ for the Model 94AE. This load gives sticky extraction in the TC barrel.This is an accurate load that gives me hope for the 100 grain bullets in the Winchester.

I shot the NEI 117 grain cast bullet into a group about equal to any of the jacketed bullets. The load was 19.0 gr of IMR 3031. This load giving 1776fps with an E of 63 and an SD of 24fps. I was looking to see if this load was position sensitive. It gave not indication of trouble with the cartridges loaded through the magazine.

The 100 grain Partition load may have given a lesser pressure indication if loaded shorter. The Benchmark loads I have loaded up with the Remington 100 grain bullets are seated shorter so we will see.

Back in the ‘80's when Reagan changed the rules on mail order cartridges and Tillinghast and a few others were still selling collector cartridges from lists I collected a great many different .25-20 and .32-20 cartridges. Why I did not think to add to my gaggle of .25-35's I don’t know. The internet has changed the collector cartridge game quite a bit, availability and prices have changed significantly. I will not play the bid games of the auction sites so my cartridge collecting days are about over.

Mattern in his Handloading Ammunition writes about some .25-35 cases having the small rifle primer. Does anyone have an example with the small primer?

Logan and Datig don’t spend much time on the cartridge. I have not seen the WCF books yet. They are at the upper limit of my book price range.

The 1940 Shooters Bible lists ballistics for 11 different.25-35 loads. 10 are 117 grain bullets and one 87 grain bullet is listed.
The loaded cartridge list has seven 117 grain cartridges for sale with one 87 grain load. Two of the 117 grain loads have boat tail bullets, some of the are Open Point Expanding (OPE) or hollow points. Does anyone have a .25-35 cartridge in their collection with a boat tail bullet? Does anyone have a .25-35 with a OPE bullet?

Mattern lists a number of 100 grain loads for the .25-35 in his book. He lists loads up to 2500 fps but does not mention the bullet mfr. Mattern does say the 100 grain load with the Lubaloy bullet at 2550fps and HiVel powder is a high velocity load at low pressure. He also says the 100 grain bullet at 1450 is THE squirrel load.

I have been asked some questions about the killing power of the .25-35. I believe it is adequate under todays conditions for unalarmed deer. Kenneth Fuller Lee coined the phrase “Killability” in the 1940's. Here are his words.:
“For purposes of comparison we can group the .25 Remington rimless and the .25-35 Winchester, as they use bullets of the same weight and the loads for these cases are practically identical. These loads are available in several types of arms at the present time, the Models '94, 55, and 64 Winchester lever guns: the Remington automatic and the slide-action taking them. There are still a few of the Stevens Hi-Powers chambered for the .25 rimless in use, and now and then one runs across a specimen of the old Standard gas-operated rifles taking this same load. About the only bolt-action arm chambered for such cartridge-was the Remington Model 30. Using the 117 grain bullet at approximately 2300 feet per second and delivering a blow of about 1300 foot pounds at the muzzle, these loads work fairly well on deer and even black bear under ideal conditions.
The writer has shot plenty of deer with these loads, and has hunted with others who used them with good success, but they are distinctly not to be considered as suitable for use on deer in the hands of anyone but an expert. My own experience in hunting with the .25-35 has taught me not to use it on quartering or straight-away running shots, as the bullets lack sufficient weight and punch to assure deep penetration under such conditions. If standing shots at a broadside target at reasonable range can be obtained, and you are confident of placing your shots in a vital area, these little cartridges will turn the trick nicely on deer.
No gun salesman who knows his stuff will ever sell such an arm to a green hunter. It is true that such rifles are accurate, that they are light and very handy to carry in the woods, that they have very little recoil . . . and will kill medium-heavy game when all the conditions are perfect. Unfortunately, it is also true that nine men out of ten will wound more game than they will kill when using such light bullets. Even in the hands of a moderately expert hunter, there is a bad tendency to take chances on running shots, or shots at too great a distance. Light bullets lose their punch very rapidly at distances greater than 200 yards, a factor which enters into the too frequent”

“Big bullets, having sufficient power to tunnel a wide, deep wound through meat and bone, have several advantages. They deliver a knock-down punchwhich is generally sufficient to anchor the game immediately, and if they fail to kill on impact, the wound so produced will bleed freely. This makes the tracker's job much simpler than would be the case if a lighter, smaller bullet had been used. The writer's experiences with the .25 Rimless, .25-35 and -25'36 (Marlin) early convinced him that while such bullets will kill game as large as the black bear when properly placed . . . they are unsatisfactory in the hands of the novice. The lack of bullet-width prevents them from making wounds which produce a good blood-trail, they have not sufficient velocity to obtain the explosive effect of the .250-3000, .270 and similar "fast" loads. For the man who can pick his shots and is able to shoot with nail driving accuracy they will kill game . . . but even he will do much better work with a .32 Special, a .303 or a .35 Rimless.”

Other writers with a liking for the cartridge had similar observations. These include C. E. Hagie, Townsend Whelen, F. C. Ness, Maj. Charles Askins Sr., Dr. Henry Stebbins and a few others. I would like to hear from anyone with information on articles or books which mention the .25-35 cartridge in pre-1920 writings (other than Charlie Askins Outers book from 1912).

Did some more shooting with 25-35 AI EABCO M97. For comparison sake I checked the case capacity of 25-35 AI vs 250 Savage the 25-35 AI holds 43.3 gr of IMR4320 and the Savage holds 45.1 gr of IMR 4320. I have found that I can use anywhere from 2 grs less than max 250 Savage loads up to max listed 250 loads in the little bit I have worked with it so far. CCI 200 primers.

100GR Sierra MK
IMR4320 34 gr 2741 fps ES=81 group size = 1.9"
IMR4320 35 gr 2798 fps ES=102 group size = 1.8"
VARGET 33 gr 2693 fps ES=28 group size = .85"
VARGET 34 gr 2774 fps ES=55 group size = 1.2"
VARGET 35 gr 2831 fps ES=68 group size = 1.0" Max?

Nosler 85gr Ballistic Tip
VARGET 36 gr 2991 fps ES=45 group size = 1.3" Max?
IMR4895 33 gr 2752 fps ES=40 group size = .95 " No pressure

IMR 4320 has not performed well at all so far. I have only fired one or two groups with each so this is not statistically very significant, but it gives an idea of what improvement the AI version is capable of. I'll post more later - been silhouette shooting and going on vacation to west coast so it may be awhile before I get to really work with this one. I am expecting better accuracy out of the M97 rifle. As always start low and work up - my rifle is a falling block single shot and appears to have a long throat and may be able to be loaded hotter than what I would imagine some lever guns could be.

Greg,
Working on the roof this morning. High winds this week have blown some shingles off.
We are high milage drivers, 30,000+ miles per yr. We try to change the xmsn fluid and filter every 60 to 80,000 miles. A new GM product will run between 225 and 250,000 miles without significant maintenance. Drove a Caprice 225,000 miles and never pulled the spark plugs. The car got better fuel milage when we sold it than when new.

Just measured some of my new .25-35 cases. Nine out of ten measure 2.023". One in ten measures 2.025".

Have you settled on the Ackley case for your Improved trials?

Will shoot the H322 100 grain loads in the yard this afternoon, if I dont fall off the roof first!

Well I got the Hodgdon Benchmark loads shot before the bugs ran me back into the house. The wind was blowing but on my sheltered bench they were “open for business!”

Using the 86 grain Remington JFN .25-20 bullet in Win. .25-35 brass with Win LR primers. At fifty yards.
21.0 grains gave 2009 fps.
23.0 grains gave 2235 fps.
25.0 grains gave 2460 fps.
27.0 grains gave 2656 fps
27.0 grains gave 2849 fps.

All extreme spreads were in the 30 fps range. Probably thanks more to the fore end stop that put the muzzle the same distance from the screens for each shot. Still having trouble with the last of these Winchester gold colored LR primers, many of them requiring a second strike to fire.
You cannot tell a lot at fifty yards but each group was about 0.6 to 0.75".

Switching to the 100 grain Remington spitzer (.250 Savage bullet) the shooting became more interesting. Again using Hodgdon Benchmark with Win. .25-35 Brass, Win LR primers. I loaded these out to just short of the rifling.

22.0 grains gave us 2083 fps with an E of 39 and SD of 20 fps.
23.0 grains gave us 2145 fps with an E of 21 and SD of 11 fps.
24.0 grains gave us 2270 fps with an E of 6 and SD of 3 fps.
25.0 grains gave us 2385 fps with an E of 8 and SD of 4 fps.

The 24.0 grain load really looks like a shooter to me. This load shot into one hole. All of the other groups were very small (considering the fifty yard distance I don’t want to get excited yet ).
The 25.0 grain load does not appear to be a maximum load. I measured three cases that had been previously fired and full length resized. The largest case measured 0.4119" at the pressure ring. After firing the pressure ring measured 0.4125" for 0.0006" expansion. The primer is just starting to show a good sharp corner where the firing pin struck. There were no extraction difficulties. I believe the 24.0 grain load is plenty for this rifle. I need to look a little closer at Benchmark.

William, sir,

In a previous post you had asked about the "new" 86gr 25-20 bullet... www.gmdr.com/levern/2520-86grDiffVers.jpg the one on the left is an example of a 1980's-mid90's bullet; the one on the left is the "new and improved" version (with the two crimp grooves)... and the one in the middle is what happens when a protobullet gets into a final swaging machine, backwards.

As you can see: the new bullet is quite different from the historic one - the old one was/is designed for a slow twist barrel, a la the 1:16 of a 25-20 [wide meplat, short radius ogive] The new one, the radius of the ogive is significantly greater (5s vs 3s??) and as such is more for a 1:12 barrel. [Which may be why is shot sooo much worse than the rest of the 25-35 data.] Actually it almost looks like they used a 87gr sptz final swaging die.

So: if one has a source of the old (good ones) - buy them up. If someone would share their souce, such would be appreciated [midwayusa is now selling the "new" ones] - we're looking for 2k bullets.

do shoot straight,
greg
www.gmdr.com