Shooters Forum banner

1 - 5 of 5 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
738 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Marshall Stanton,
I am posing this question to you because you make the bullets here.  And I suppose it has been asked before.  I have read many articles about using cast bullets in rifles normally set up for jacketed bullets, and most of them, in fact all of them that I have read list reduced loads only.

I have had 30-30's forever.  Currently I have only one.  A pre USRAC 16" trapper.
Here in central IL there is very few places to shoot a rifle.  One indoor range near me will allow the trapper even with jacket loads because the short barrel drops the vel. down below the max his backstop will handle.  
Since I rarely hunt any more, why would I want to shoot up very expensive jacketed bullets, when lead ones will do just as good?  

My ammo supply is running low and I want to load up a batch.  
I would like to use a round nose or flat nose cast bullet no heavier than 165grs, and push it to the same velocity as the jacketed bullets.

What bullet, powder combination would be best to achieve my goal?  Whats the best lube if I cook my own?  And is it .001 or .002 over grove dia that works best?

I currently have one mold, a Lyman 170gr, I think, flat point GC.  It hasn't been used in years, but I think I remember how.  And if I can get some good alloy and lube it would be useable.

Thanks for any info you can give me on this subject, and sorry for this wordy post.
Joe
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,598 Posts
JMiller,
That 170 grain Lyman is probably the#31141 or the newer #311041. Top velocity in the 30/30,with that bullet,is between 2100 and 2200 FPS. You can get that with a cast bullet,if the alloy is hard enough,or it is paper patched.
In that respect,the 30/30 is an Ideal cartridge to cast bullets for.
After some experimenting,I discovered that my paper patched bullet loads had similar powder charges as my jackeded bullet loads. The only difference being that jacketed bullets needed more powder then the others did,for the same velocity.
Frank
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13 Posts
I have had great results with slow burning powder filling the case even to the popint of compresion.  I think but cannot remember, that I loaded 35 grs of 4350 with your same bullets and got 1in groups with my Mod 54 at 100 yds.  I have the load written down but am 5000 away from home right now
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
3,365 Posts
Joe,

As mentioned already, the odds are that your mold is indeed a Lyman #311041, or by the old nomenclature #31141.  Either way it is ideally suited to the .30-30 both in dimensions for the bore and the throat of your chamber as well.

That bullet, when cast out of wheel-weight alloy, gas checked and sized to .310" will shoot like gangbusters in your gun without a whole lot of tinkering.  Use a top-quality lube, this will be the most insignificant cost component in your loads, but will surely make or break your cast bullet accuracy.... especially as velocities and pressures near factory equivilent loads, so don't scrimp on lube quality! Make sure that you use an "M" type neck expanding die for best results, and use any starting loads for comparable jacketed bullet weights that are published, and you're on excellent ground for load development.

The advice about the slower burning powders is excellent.... I've done that for years, using compressed charges of 4831, H870, H1000, MRP and the like.   Velocities aren't exactly top, but the accuracy is outstanding!

For full-snort factory equivilent loads, your best powders will probably be RL-7, H335, IMR 3031 and AA2015.  These powders have always contributed excellent .30-30 cast bullet accuracy with a minimum of load development when full-velocity loads were the objective.

Dive in and enjoy!  You'll be ruined for life! <!--emo&:D--><img src="http://beartoothbullets.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':D'><!--endemo-->

God Bless,

Marshall



<!--EDIT|Marshall Stanton|Feb. 27 2002,14:45-->
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
738 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Marshall,
Thanks for the information.  I will surely give it a try.  And I'll let you know what my results are.
Joe
 
1 - 5 of 5 Posts
Top