In the next 45 days I will begin to develop loads for my 336 in .35 Remington.

I am interested in BTB's 185gr FN, 180gr WLN+P, 200gr FN hardcasts, as well as Speer 180gr JFPs and Rem 200gr Core-Lokts (any others?). I want loads for whitetail and feral hog/javelina.

What are your favorite bullet/load, why, and for what game?

Here are some loads that are equivilent to factory pressure with a lot of different powders.

180 Speer flat point Winchester W-748 42.0 2,190

180 Speer flat point Accurate AAC-2520 40.5 2,222

180 Speer flat point IMR IMR-4320 38.0 2,159

180 Speer flat point Accurate AAC-2460 37.5 2,140

180 Speer flat point Alliant RL-12 37.0 2,049

180 Speer flat point IMR IMR-4064 37.0 2,031

180 Speer flat point Accurate AAC-2015 37.0 2,199

180 Speer flat point Accurate AAC-2230 37.0 2,153

200 Hornady roundnose Winchester W-748 41.0 2,049

200 Hornady roundnose Accurate AAC-2520 39.0 2,140

200 Hornady roundnose Hodgdon H-335 38.5 2,206

200 Hornady roundnose IMR IMR-4320 37.0 2,093

200 Hornady roundnose Accurate AAC-2460 37.0 2,074

200 Hornady roundnose Alliant RL-12 37.0 2,021

200 Hornady roundnose IMR IMR-4064 36.5 1,989 (This is my standard load for my 336. It shoots under one inch at 100 yards)

200 Hornady roundnose Accurate AAC-2015 36.5 2,070

200 Hornady roundnose IMR IMR-4895 36.0 2,048

200 Hornady roundnose IMR IMR-3031 34.0 2,011

220 Speer flat point Winchester W-760 41.5 1,872

220 Speer flat point Hodgdon H-414 40.0 1,874

220 Speer flat point Winchester W-748 36.5 1,928

220 Speer flat point Accurate AAC-2520 35.5 1,899

220 Speer flat point IMR IMR-4064 34.0 1,861

220 Speer flat point IMR IMR-4320 32.5 1,787

Thanks for posting the load information I think I might take my grandfathers .35 remington (336C) out shooting.

With the Beartooth 185gr. "+P" handgun bullet, order it sized 0.359" and the load is as much Varget as you can get in the case.

The "+P" one is the bullet you want and I would not bother with the other 180gr. bullet.

200gr. bullets - the only thing really suitable for the .35 Rem is the RCBS 205gr. FNGC. Everything else has the crimp groove in the wrong place. Use published 200gr. jacketed bullet loads - again, a case full of Varget works well. I haven't tried anything else.

You should be able to get about 2300fps with the 185gr. bullet and a bit over 2,000 with the RCBS. Use the Lee Factory Crimp die with either cast load - just seat them to barely kiss the rifling when the bolt closes.

Jacketed experience is limited to the 200gr. Core-Lokt bullet, which works very well indeed for a cheap bullet/load. If it shoots in your gun it's never the wrong choice.

I did put one of the old 150gr. Remington spitzers through a jackrabbit once. It was fatal to the jackrabbit but I have no idea how it would fare against bigger critters.

Have fun and good luck.

I have a old Speer number 9 manual here (it seem they are more conservative in new ones) and they list warmer loads for 220 gr flat nose.

37.5 gr of 4064 for 2049 fps (IMR)
37.0 gr or 4895 for 2012 fps (IMR)
35.5 gr of 3031 for 2037 fps (IMR)

For the 180 gr flat nose they show

42.5 gr of 4064 for 2309 fps (IMR)
42.0 gr of 4895 for 2353 fps (IMR)
42.5 gr of 3031 for 2427 fps (IMR)

These are top three loads for both and they would be quite effective in field.

I shoot a remington 141 in .35 rem the best load that i have found is with the speer 180 gr flat nose 40 gr. of imr 3031 and rem 9 1/2 primers. This load shots great out of my 141 might wanna give that a try

For 200gn remCl 39gn H4895 works well for me. Thats out of a Rem7600 it is over max in some books. But I know some guys go as high as 42gns in there 336 marlins.

Russ

For the 180 gr flat nose they show

42.5 gr of 4064 for 2309 fps (IMR)
42.0 gr of 4895 for 2353 fps (IMR)
42.5 gr of 3031 for 2427 fps (IMR)

These are top three loads for both and they would be quite effective in field.

Wow, I like that 3031 load. The dies shipped today. I have Varget in stock. What would be a good starting place with Varget and the Speer 180g flat nose?

Here is the chart for varget using the speer 180 grain. I have tried using 39.5 gr of varget before out of my 141 but for my gun the 3031 grouped so much better.

180 GR. SPR FN Hodgdon Varget .358" 2.470" 37.0 1972 27,200 CUP 40.5 2196 32,500 CUP

The reason that the old books have different information in them than the new ones is due to the fact that when the old books were published the powder companys the powder was dirty and had some filler in it. So be extremely carefull when using new powder with an old book. Best suggestion dont pay any attention to what an old reloading book says.

The reason that the old books have different information in them than the new ones is due to the fact that when the old books were published the powder companys the powder was dirty and had some filler in it. So be extremely carefull when using new powder with an old book. Best suggestion dont pay any attention to what an old reloading book says.

If there was filler in it then what was making the velocities higher? If filler was used then I should be able to reduce by 10% or more and have the same velocities. Or charge the same and have higher velocities. This has not been the case. Am I missing something? Maybe I've become cynical in my old age, but powders should get better, not worse if mfgrs are watching their process. There's more precise measuring equipment than before, and better quality control than 20 years ago. Sure there's minute differences from batch to batch, but to be within 17 fps for a published load (example below)...I ain't buyin' the data from the newer manuals as being a true "MAX LOAD", meaning "at the top of the design for pressure for said firearm with said cartridge" in their test gun when 2 manuals back it was 10-15% higher.

The exception to this trend would be a .30-30 150g roundnose max load published by Alliant with 36g of their RL-15 powder for 2450 fps. In my gun in hot weather this load does 2467 fps from my 1976 336 20" barrel, so it's pretty close.

Just disgusting.

Umm im missing something with what you said you should compare all of speer's books i have 6-13 and they all have one trend with the cleaner powder now you get more velocity.
If you ever want something interesting to look up look up the info on how dirty imr was and how it comparest to how it is now.

Umm I'm missing something with what you said you should compare all of speer's books i have 6-13 and they all have one trend with the cleaner powder now you get more velocity.
If you ever want something interesting to look up look up the info on how dirty IMR was and how it compared to how it is now.

Sorry for the rant. I'm just disgusted that the max loads come down every reprinting of the manuals (in most cases), with the max published load for a particular bullet producing less and less velocity over the years.

Example: Speer's #9 manual shows 42.5 gr of 3031 under a 180g FN for 2427 fps (IMR), but the current published max load in todays manual produced [approx} 2220 fps. 2196 fps is the top load on Hodgdon's sight. Maybe it's me who's missing something, but I don't get the 200+ fps drop in max load velocity with the exact same bullet compared to several years back.

I have received the Lee dies and will begin loading the Speer's 180g FN this week. My goal is 2350-2400 fps. I won't find a load for it in the new manuals most likely, but the older manuals show it, and several on this forum have achieved these results in their 336, and been pleased with the results. Any words of wisdom on the front end?

You guys might want to do a little searching on the forums, before you conclude that there has been a massive conspiracy to irritate you, by printing different loading manuals.

IMR did change powder formulation(s) back in the 1970s sometime, if I recall, and furthermore there were a lot of reloading manuals published back in the 1950s and 1960s without the benefit of actual pressure measurements.

Personally I'm glad that someone is looking out for my eyes, fingers, toes, and whatnot.

You guys might want to do a little searching on the forums, before you conclude that there has been a massive conspiracy to irritate you, by printing different loading manuals.

IMR did change powder formulation(s) back in the 1970s sometime, if I recall, and furthermore there were a lot of reloading manuals published back in the 1950s and 1960s without the benefit of actual pressure measurements.

Personally I'm glad that someone is looking out for my eyes, fingers, toes, and whatnot.

I believe the Speer #9 Reloading Manual was publish until 1978 or later.

You guys might want to do a little searching on the forums, before you conclude that there has been a massive conspiracy to irritate you, by printing different loading manuals.

IMR did change powder formulation(s) back in the 1970s sometime, if I recall, and furthermore there were a lot of reloading manuals published back in the 1950s and 1960s without the benefit of actual pressure measurements.

Personally I'm glad that someone is looking out for my eyes, fingers, toes, and whatnot.

I believe the Speer #9 Reloading Manual was published until 1978 or later.

I have some 30 year old IMR 4064 and some new last year IMR 4064. Grain for grain they shoot within 20 to 30 feet per second of each other. That is in 22-250, 30-06, and the 35. Someone forgot to add the filler and dirt to that old keg of IMR 4064!

Why are max loads reduced? As Mike says, better test equipment. Also lawyers and liability.

.

If my mind is correct the speer #9 book came out in 1974. I Still will follow the new books i would rather be safe than sorry plus we have better chronographs now for measuring the speed.

You guys might want to do a little searching on the forums, before you conclude that there has been a massive conspiracy to irritate you, by printing different loading manuals.

IMR did change powder formulation(s) back in the 1970s sometime, if I recall, and furthermore there were a lot of reloading manuals published back in the 1950s and 1960s without the benefit of actual pressure measurements.

Personally I'm glad that someone is looking out for my eyes, fingers, toes, and whatnot.

You are very correct and thats what i was saying. I learned one major thing in my 18 years of reloading it is that every other year you go out and buy a new reloading book to check your loads based on the new data. Dont through the old ones away keep them as a reference but always start with the data in the new book. I would rather be safe than sorry anyday.

I know on the Marlin forum, I've read that some guys push the 35 Rem to the limit. One line of thinking is the .35 Remington is limited to 33,500 psi, while the .30-30 goes to 42,000 psi in the same 336 Marlin action and leaves them room to work with. I can't say or comment on that..I have virtually no knowledge on the matter....but there's some excellent write ups and tests there on the 35 Rem.

A point to remember is that hot 35 Remington loads in the old Remington autoloaders will damage them. Normally 36.0 grains of 3031 and a 200 grain Core-Lokt is MAX for them, so that's where the newer manuals stop. Whether a Marlin can handle more is another question. The .35 Remington has 18% more base area, disregarding the .30-30's rim which doesn't count, so you're looking at about the equivalent of 39,500 psi in a .30-30.

Bye
Jack

The .35 Remington has 18% more base area, disregarding the .30-30's rim which doesn't count, so you're looking at about the equivalent of 39,500 psi in a .30-30.

Why doesn't the .30-30's full rim diameter count, Jack? I thought that was why the Williams chamber works in the old Remington 550 with .22 shorts, and why the Colt Service Model Ace and conversion unit had recoil simulating that of the .45


Thanks,

The Old Guy

The maximum inside diameter of the case is what counts, as that's the only place the powder gases can push on. The wider rim of the .30-30 reduces pressure on the bolt face, but that doesn't change the total force on the locking lugs.

Bye
Jack

The maximum inside diameter of the case is what counts, as that's the only place the powder gases can push on. The wider rim of the .30-30 reduces pressure on the bolt face, but that doesn't change the total force on the locking lugs.

Thanks, Jack. Took me a while to wrap my mind around that, but now I realize it has to be that way -- the only place the pressure is exerting its force is inside the case. Dunno why I didn't see it before. . .

The Old Guy

I'm running my .35 Rem loads a little above 'normal,' same as my .45 Colt loads in full-sized Rugers.

As long as you are cautious about it, and apply some common sense, this isn't necessarily dangerous. But you do have to accept that things can go wrong if you aren't careful, same as with any deviation from published loading data.

Thanks guys. I begin tonight. It's great to have so much of your experience to start with. I'll run them over the chronograph and report the results.

You may want to look through the piece .35Remington did up on the .35.
Lot of good stuff and a great write-up.

http://www.suitorsgarage.com/gunstuff/35remington/factoryloadpart1.html

blackfly

I've loaded some Speer 180g FNs with 41.8g and 42.1g of Varget respectively, based on what some have suggested with this bullet (.35Remington says don't bother with this bullet unless you get it over 2300 fps). I'll run them over the Chrony this weekend, and also look at accuracy, and let you know my results. I may need to try the H335 and/or IMR3031 to get to my desired speed, but we'll see.

Got to the range today with the .35. I was disappointed in the velocities achieved by a full case of Varget; with 41.8g I got 2178 fps, and with 42.1g I got 2237 fps. But the accuracies were good, 1.5" @ 100 yards with wind.

This is a good, accurate bullet in the .35 Rem. Not I just need to get the speed up so it'll open when I hit something with it.

Any suggestions?

Try loading some up with 3031.

Try loading some up with 3031.

Thanks Gmfam...I'm looking at that and H335.

I have had the thought of reloading some Hornady XTP 180 grain bullets (.357 Max/Magnum) in the .35 Remington.

I am using Lil' Gun powder in the .357 magnum load, dunno what powder fits the .35 Remington with that bullet.

I would love to find out if either Lil' Gun, or H4895 would be feasible with that bullet/cartridge combo cause I use those two powders now.

Given that either one was feasible, the Suitability (smartness) would be the next thing to find out .. :)

fwiw, I'm not trying to beef up the .35 Remington into a magnum.. I'm trying to add a lower energy but serious terminal performance bullet to the Factory Ammo spectrum. Using a bullet that is optimized for expansion at the 1000-2000 fps range towards the top of the range will give very predictable performance. It won't *quite* splatter, but open up like an umbrella you can pretty much count on. The XTP in fact is famous for just that. So, rather'n having a revolver or single shot pistol shooting that hot thang at 1850 fps, hows about a carbine that treats that combo like a hiccup? I'd be a lot happier with a 7 lb lever gun and the pistol bullet than i am with a 3 lb revolver and the same energy levels. Ouch!..

anyway, i'm not wanting to get more'n about 1750-1850 with that XTP and have every hope it'd handle it fine. it OUGHT to work. :)

There's lots of data for H4895 powder in the .35 Remington, none for Lil'Gun. This data is for the 180 grain Speer. Most .35 Remington rifles have a very short throat, so you might have to seat the XTP to the second cannelure. That will reduce case capacity some. I'd check Hodgdon's data and reduce your load a grain or two below the published minimum.

http://www.hodgdon.com/

Bye
Jack

Another powder that is showing promise is Ramshot's TAC. I've gotten some very good velocities with it but I haven't grouped them yet...hopefully this week.

I'd go with what Jack said. Work up slow; they don't have to be running full throttle to be spectactular on the receiving end.

Take pics if you hit anything with them :D

OK guys, I'm loading the 180g Speer and I went a bit less than the spec for OAL and it still was too tight trying to chamber the round. What OAL can I go with on this bullet? And I guess I have the "short throat" thing? Help!

Speer's C.O.L. spec for the #2435 bullet is 2.470. I have some Winchester bulk brass that I had to trim to 1.900" as it was short out of the bag. The box I've got loaded up is 2.455" C.O.L. and I could go shorter. I'd trim and try 2.455" and if that doesn't work back .005" at a time to 2.440. Speers don't taper in front of the cannelure as fast as Remington 200 grain Core-Lokts, so the Core-Lokt might fit without extra case shortening.

Bye
Jack

Speer's C.O.L. spec for the #2435 bullet is 2.470. I have some Winchester bulk brass that I had to trim to 1.900" as it was short out of the bag. The box I've got loaded up is 2.455" C.O.L. and I could go shorter. I'd trim and try 2.455" and if that doesn't work back .005" at a time to 2.440. Speers don't taper in front of the cannelure as fast as Remington 200 grain Core-Lokts, so the Core-Lokt might fir without extra case shortening.

Bye
Jack

Thanks Jack. I'll look into that and take some measurements. I'll make a dummy round to see if it will chamber, seating progressively deeper till I get a good fit. Should have done that first...doh!

Greetings guys, I don't get around as much as I like to anymore but I love these topics about reloading our levergun calibers. Not to take away from Marshall bullets, he knows I think they are the greatest, but I've done quite a bit of pressure testing on a bullet of my design for the home caster. I offer the data that follows just for a comparison against all the loads above. A number of years ago, I purchased Southwest Products Pressure Trace Equipment and it was probably one of the biggest and best steps I've ever taken in my reloading work endeavor.

This data represents my look at my 1954 Marlin 336SC chambered in 35 Rem. Nothing unusual or special about it other than it has a strain gage attached to the standard 20" barrel. The bullet is my TLC359-190-RF (http://www.ranchdogmolds.com/TLC359190RF/). The brass is your run of the mill, Remington multiple shot, full length sized with the Lee Pacesetter dies.

I've gained a tremendous amount of experience in working with Hodgdon powder and when I sit down with a new bullet my past work with this equipment allows me to make an educated guess as to what I will see for maximum charges. With each powder, during this initial work, I can sit back and look at the powders in 5% case density increments, from 80% to 105%, and pretty much know at what point a powder is going to exceed an acceptable pressure.

To work with powder density you have to know how much of each type of powder a case will hold and what effect the bullet seating will have on displacing the powder. Why I work with densities is again based on my reloading experience being supported with pressure trace equipment. A full case is a happy case and the accuracy a full case of powder delivers will always produce better groups than an case that is less dense. In other words, I can look at say... H322 and know from experience of shooting these pressure curves that a 100% density is going to be very close to reaching or exceeding a safe working load so my initial work will be with the case density of 95%. To work with stuff at this level is the product of collecting a lot of information in a database of my design and developing "number crunchers" that make this work with each individual cartridge. I won't share that stuff with you.

In that I'm talking densities, you do need some numbers (with any reloading effort) to work with. The Remington cases have a H20 capacity of 51.5 grains. They are trimmed 1.914" with my Lee Case Trimmer. The bullet (.789" long) is seated to a cartridge OAL of 2.30" (most Marlins chambered in 35 Rem do not have a throat/leade) which displaces 10.3-grains of H20 delivering a final case capacity of 41.2-grains. I have found case densities below 80% to produce unacceptable accuracy with any powder and I have also found that case densities greater than 105% are tough to get a cast bullet seated. With the lubed bullet, the powder compression won't allow the bullet to pass from the bullet seating die to the crimp die without the powder compression causing the OAL to extend.

For my personal use, I consider a safe working pressure for my 336 actions to be 42.0K PSI. The images below are a composite of the pressure graph and statistic output of the pressure trace software. The header on the pressure graph indicates the powder and charge (XX.X). Here is what the various powders produced in the chamber and out the barrel...

http://www.ranchdogmolds.com/TLC359190RF/Images/080728/PT_Benchmark.gif
95% case density, a candidate for exploring 100% (37.3) but I would work up to that load in 5 increments with the pressure trace equipment.

http://www.ranchdogmolds.com/TLC359190RF/Images/080728/PT_BLC2.gif
100% case density, another candidate for working up to 105% (43.4)

http://www.ranchdogmolds.com/TLC359190RF/Images/080728/PT_H322.gif
95% case density, might not make 100% (36.8).

http://www.ranchdogmolds.com/TLC359190RF/Images/080728/PT_H335.gif
90% case density, will not increase.

http://www.ranchdogmolds.com/TLC359190RF/Images/080728/PT_H4198.gif
90% case density, will not increase.

http://www.ranchdogmolds.com/TLC359190RF/Images/080728/PT_H4895.gif
105% case density, a great powder for the 35 Rem!

http://www.ranchdogmolds.com/TLC359190RF/Images/080728/PT_Varget.gif
105% case density, just not enough energy!

Like I said, just real velocity and pressure numbers to use against the publish data listed throughout this thread.

Fantastic info Ranch Dog!!! I didn't see IMR3031 represented. A number of new manuals don't show this powder used, but the old manuals do. I am curious if you've tested 3031 with your test equipment in .35 Remington. The Speer Number 9 manual shows 41.5g with Speer's 180g JFN making 2427 fps. 2400 is my goal with this tough bullet. It fills the case pretty well and I have to shake it to settle before I seat the bullet. Maybe a slight compression.

I'll load a dummy round with the Speer 180 JFN and seat it lower and lower till it works in the 336's action and just kisses the lands of the rifling, but without pushing it up the barrel. Then I will duplicate my loads from before using IMR3031, Remington brass, and WLR primers.

I'll then go to the range Friday :D to test those loads for accuracy and clock them for speed. I'll also clock some Hornady gummy tips for comparison as well as compare POI at 100 yards.

Fantastic info Ranch Dog!!! I didn't see IMR3031 represented.

No, I only use the Hodgdon brands.

Thanks for sharing the data with us Ranch Dog.

Am I correct in thinking that the load with H4895 shows promise because of pressures being just slightly below your personal max, efficiency consistently very high, and velocities running pretty high? What else can a guy deduce by looking at this data?

How does H4895 group in your rifle? Have you performed a similar set of experiments with other bullets, perhaps with the 200 gr Remington RN CL?

Why do some loads have pressure rising after reaching zero? Varget in particular has significant ringing. Is the zero point where the bullet leaves the barrel?

How does this system perform for selecting charge weights based on barrel exit timing predictions?

Last but not least, where can a guy buy your bullets precast? I have been eyeing some of the 30-30 bullets for awhile, but am not in a position to start casting yet.

I have my first 35 Rem workups ready to go with Varget, IMR3031, and Benchmark. Looks like I need to get a can of H4895 too.

You should try 3031. It's been the go-to powder for the .35 Remington since before Hodgdon was in business and the best I've found.

Bye
Jack

I've updated the H4198 and Varget charts to emphasis the bullet exit points.

Smokey,

There is a bunch of information to be taken from the output screens that covers about 60 pages in the user manual but let me just hit a couple of the points that you mentioned.

The point at which the bullets exits the barrel is identified with a "+" symbol. An assumption made is that the closer the symbols are together, the tighter the groups will be. Same thing as looking at SD and ES. This software is able to add another dimension to be considered and it is called Optimum Barrel Timing (OBT). Loads that exit points are co-located with OBT markers will have individual shots with the smallest possible dispersion of the given group based on resonances in the barrel. A barrel flexes at the shot, the ideal spot for the bullet to exit is as the barrel passes through the "neutral" position. This electronically does the same thing that some shooter do by shooting the "Ladder". Do a search on this forum for "ladder".

How you control the exit point vs. OBT is by increasing or decreasing the load. It is more or less trial and error but it is easy to work with. For instance, I might try reducing the H4198 load by about .3-grains and reshoot the 32.0-grain load and then a 31.7-grain load and compare the OBT markers and of course, the targets. This is just another tool that the equipment gives you.

When shooting a string with a single charge, the "Efficiency" column on the Statistical output page does not really tell you much. It is very helpful when you shoot a string of different charges of the same powder. Back to H4198 load. The first step would be to shoot 5 individual, incremental shots up to the max load. You could then compare the efficiency and OBT markers and pretty much move directly to a load that is going to produce from the get go. This equipment can eliminate a lot of shooting.

You pointed out one area that is gleaned from the chart data. Varget is not appropriate because the powder is still burning long after the barrel has left the barrel. The powder burn is too slow to be of use.

Here is a chart that represents the actual groups as shot during this pressure trace work. Use it to compare the graphs and markers. H4198 and H335 look pretty good. Moving the load slightly could possibly make this old rifle a real shooter at a near max load.

http://www.ranchdogmolds.com/TLC359190RF/Images/080728/Groups.gif

This bullet isn't available if you are not casting it yourself (the molds are available yet either). I would suggest purchasing the Beartooth 180-grain WLN+P, it is listed in the "Shopping Cart" and in the "38/357 Caliber" selection.

Jack... I can't go out and buy a pound of powder without a fairly long drive so I've always purchased large containers. I have all the Hodgdon choices, which is a heck of a lot of powder, and left it at that. Of course, as of late they are all one and the same.

I know. It's 60 miles to the gunshops for me.

I found that H332 was very position sensitive with less than a full case, and a full case was over what the Hodgdon tech recommended as Max. 35Remington, the fellow who did those excellent bullet expansion tests, found that H322 was OK with deep seated pistol bullets that used up the space.

Bye
Jack

Reloaded the Speer 180 FN with 3031, this time at the right COL, barely touching the lands.

***THESE LOADS WERE FINE IN MY GUN. I DON'T CLAIM THEY'D BE FINE IN YOURS***

41.5g was my max load (same as the Speer #9 manual) and it was spot on 2400 fps in 97 degree weather and a steady 10-12 mph crosswind. The second shot read 2401 fps. :D 41.0g produced 2390 fps, and 40.5g produced 2380 fps. Any of these are acceptable (they open up good at these speeds), and all were accurate as well, producing around 2" groups on all of them. More accuracy work to be done. All of these loads slightly compressed the powder about 1/16". Love this 3031!

For comparison I also sent Hornady .35 Rem Leverevolution over the Chrony and downrange. The gummy tips were running 2140 fps and printing 6" low compared to the Speer 180g FN, with the Speer 260 fps faster. This Speer load is 415 fps faster than Factory Core-Lokts. Brass looks fine and was not hard to resize.

I've learned a lot. I listened to U2's "Still Haven't Found What I'm Looking For" as I pulled away from the range...LOUD! :cool:

Great job NTL! You must have been on top of the world. That is really outstanding performance.

Great job NTL! You must have been on top of the world. That is really outstanding performance.

Thanks Bill M. "Greatly fulfilled" was the emotion I was feeling; along with "Why the cheese is whitetail season so far off?" Might have to do an "expansion and penetration test" on some hog with that load in the meantime!

Guys

Thanks for hanging with me through all of this. Your encouragement and interest have meant a lot. Your years of experience have been a great guide to me along the way.

I've posted all load info to the spreadsheet. Also the info on the Hornady factory rounds. This way I can reference the info whenever I need to duplicate it, or when developing new loads. I keep this info on all calibers and for all loads for all bullet weights and profiles.

Don't need it right now, but I'd like to duplicate the Buffalo Bore Speer 220g FN load sometime in the future, the one that has that sledgehammer going 2200 fps.

Additionally I'd like a load for the BTB .359 180g WLN+P hardcast like Mike G shoots, up around 2300 fps; probably a preferred bullet for feral hog.

I also will develop a load around The 200g Core-Lokt bullet to around 2200 fps.

I'll have lots more questions for you, but I'll start new threads for them. I'm loving the Marlin 336's and the 1894!

Thanks
N2L

Hmmmmmm.....

Ranch Dog's data is interesting, because I am using Varget with very different results. While I completely believe what he has posted, I'd like to understand why we have different results.

Not sure if it's the different lots of powder we are using, or what, but I am running the Beartooth bullet at about 2300 fps. However, I am managing to cram about 42gr. of Varget where he stopped at 38gr.

My loads are neck sized brass, the case filled very slowly with the 'swirl' technique written about by M.L. "Mic" McPherson, and then compressed a bit. Hasn't caused me any problems, but very different results.

All I can report is what I'm doing.....?????

I managed about 42g of Varget in the brass also, but it wasn't enough to get the Speer bullet over 2300 fps. I did think it would probably be perfect with the BTB 180g you're using, but Ranch Dog's bullet is different (maybe seats deeper?), and at 190 grains.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think you can get in trouble with Varget in .35 Remington brass, simply because you can't get enough in there to get you much over pressure, regardless of the bullet you're using.

No I don't see how it would be possible to get too much Varget in the case, either.

I just posted out of curiousity, because I was able to get so much more powder. Will have to go down to Cuero and talk shop with him on urgent matters such as this, one of these days :D

I do have Winchester and Federal brass that holds less powder. Brass capacity does make a difference sometimes.

Only tried the Speer bullet once, in my gun, it would shoot fine at the starting load. As soon as the powder charge went up, groups went south. Just didn't go any farther in that direction, as the Beartooth bullet worked great. I'm sure a little fiddling with the Speer bullet will get you what you want.

Best of luck.

Only tried the Speer bullet once, in my gun, it would shoot fine at the starting load. As soon as the powder charge went up, groups went south. Just didn't go any farther in that direction, as the Beartooth bullet worked great. I'm sure a little fiddling with the Speer bullet will get you what you want.

According to the poster 35Remington on the marlin.com forum, the Speer 180g FN is such a tough bullet that unless you have it going 2300 fps or more you'll have poor expansion. To do so the reloader must run pressure slightly higher (probably in Marlin 336s and bolt action guns only). If someone is unwilling to do this then this bullet should not be used for that someone's reloading of the .35 Remington, and he should just stick with Core-Lokts (arguably the best of jacketed) or BTB's 180g WLN+P (best of commercial hardcast). There may be some casting their own who have good .35 caliber rifle bullets too; I haven't seen any bullets from Ranch Dog's molds yet, and the 200g RCBS is made for the .35 Rem, but I know that BTB that you shoot is a killer.

I think you will find that the older loading manuals used case head expansion, primer flattening, ease of extraction to determine max loads. When they started actual pressure testing they found out alot of loads were above industry established max pressures. Some cartridges had their max pressures reduced like the 357 mag. Some oldeer cartridges are underloaded because of the large numbeer of older guns still in use. I havea rem 14 in 35 rem made in 1931 that I still shoot, its over 75 years old, you can understand caution on the part of the ammo makers. I do believe a carefull handloader can exceed the manuals max loads in new guns in good condition that chamber older lower pressure cartridges. I would however never exceed book loads with a cartridge like the 300 short mag.thats a 65,000 psi cartridge already at the ragged edge for pressure.