300 Holland & Holland ...anybody played with this one ?

[WildRose]

I'm going to give you two examples:

1). Let's say I have a Remington 700 in 280 Remington. I get the itch for something new and unscrew it and ream it out to a 280 AI. I use my leftover rounds to fire form my brass. Do you think it was dangerous to load to 65Kpsi when it was a 280 but now it is safe?

2) I really like 6.5s do I buy two new Tikkas and new Lapua brass. One is a 6.5 CM and the other a 6.5x55. Do you think it's safe to load the CM to 65Kpsi but the 6.5x55 will blow up over 50Kpsi?

I hope this clarifies my position.

You probably won't blow them up but if you're exceeding recommended pressures you're certainly going to reduce barrel life, life of your brass and quite possibly lose some accuracy.

I went through about a 20 year phase of trying to hot rod everything and it doesn't pay in the long run. If you want more velocity than the cartridge is rated for, replace it with one that is.

 

[Bart B]

Morally, I think its a bad idea to load any cartridge to pressures higher than SAAMI specs. Ne'r-do-well folks will try souping up their cartridges because someone else did and sometimes end up with proof load pressures unknowingly.

I've shot 7.62 NATO proof loads at average pressure of 67,500 cup (~81,000 psi) then showed the once fired new cases to folks that thought they looked fairly normal like their own cases.

Proof loads must not damage firearms. Including those at maximum average pressure near 90,000 psi (72,000 cup)

 

[Don A Parsons]

Just a question...

If a older made rifle was good with X pressure rating,,, would today's newer rifles handle the higher pressures...

Kinda like to old 6.5x55's compared to today's new 6.5x55 rifles... I thought that today's standards with the newer actions and bolts allowed for higher pressures...

I don't know,,, just thought I'd ask

 

[Bart B]

Just a question...

If a older made rifle was good with X pressure rating,,, would today's newer rifles handle the higher pressures...

Kinda like to old 6.5x55's compared to today's new 6.5x55 rifles... I thought that today's standards with the newer actions and bolts allowed for higher pressures...

I don't know,,, just thought I'd ask

Good question.

Yes, newer rifles are stronger. SAAMI specs are pretty much based on the weakest rifles the load will typically get fired in. Plus a safety margin.

What if very old original cases were reloaded. Will they handle higher pressures?

 

[mmacfive]

Pressure is pressure. Here is the formula to convert between cup and psi.

https://www.shootingsoftware.com/ftp/psicuparticle2.pdf

Good question.

Yes, newer rifles are stronger.

What if very old original cases were reloaded. Will they handle higher pressures?

Good question.

Yes, newer rifles are stronger.

What if very old original cases were reloaded. Will they handle higher pressures?

Older is relative. Roy Weatherby started his company in the 1940s with cartridges that are still on the high side of pressure. He also increased velocity with a lot of freebore. His original rifles were based on a FN action. Don't hold me to this but I think they began life around 1900. Yet there were still a lot of lower psi action being built at the same time. The Winchester model 70 started life around 1935, it and it predecessor both work with high pressure loads as do some of the Spanish Mausers. The new guns and actions are not really stronger. The brass is the weak link in the equation and yes it can make a difference.

 

[mmacfive]

I respond to threads when they pop up, I don't resurrect them. The quality of information and it's value doesn't diminish over time.

There is more to the equation than just case capacity. The difference in capacity may only be 1 grain but the performance is improved upon with the difference in shoulder angle.

If you're loading you can't load up an H&H enough to equal the performance of the Win if you're also maximizing the Win. I simply can't be done.

The difference in performance was enough to reduce the H&H to a niche cartridge with a small following in just a few years after the Win was introduced.

As I said, whatever you're shooting will not notice the difference when the bullet arrives but there is enough of a difference that the Win became the dominant 300 magnum round on the market and still remains so.

It was Winchester'a greatest marketing hyperboles when they introduced their "efficient" short, fat, and steep shoulder cartridges. I don't believe there is a shred of objective proof that it helps with velocity. But it remains one of those urban legends that will never die. Volume is absolute king...unless we discovered a way to cheat the laws of physics?

 

[mmacfive]

You probably won't blow them up but if you're exceeding recommended pressures you're certainly going to reduce barrel life, life of your brass and quite possibly lose some accuracy.

I went through about a 20 year phase of trying to hot rod everything and it doesn't pay in the long run. If you want more velocity than the cartridge is rated for, replace it with one that is.

It seems that If you load the 280 to the same pressure as the 280AI you should get longer barrel life than the AI since you would use less powder. And if you load a 6.5x55 to the same pressure as a 6.5 CM you should get less barrel life than the 6.5 CM since you would need more powder.

 

[HARPERC]

The H&H was originally loaded with cordite, and headed out to parts of the world that were hot much of the time, with break open actions.

One should be able to put modern bolt guns, cases, powders, primers, and bullets, to good use. Not superior to others in the game, but not obsolete.

It came in some very fine rifles!

 

[WildRose]

Morally, I think its a bad idea to load any cartridge to pressures higher than SAAMI specs. Ne'r-do-well folks will try souping up their cartridges because someone else did and sometimes end up with proof load pressures unknowingly.

I've shot 7.62 NATO proof loads at average pressure of 67,500 cup (~81,000 psi) then showed the once fired new cases to folks that thought they looked fairly normal like their own cases.

Proof loads must not damage firearms. Including those at maximum average pressure near 90,000 psi (72,000 cup)

I can't see it as a moral issue, just one of common sense and safety.

Now, if you're loading for someone else and exceeding safety limits without telling them then it would be.

 

[WildRose]

It was Winchester'a greatest marketing hyperboles when they introduced their "efficient" short, fat, and steep shoulder cartridges. I don't believe there is a shred of objective proof that it helps with velocity. But it remains one of those urban legends that will never die. Volume is absolute king...unless we discovered a way to cheat the laws of physics?

I was never bitten by the short magnum bug either as I saw it purely as marketing hype.

Winchester really blew it with the WSSM line and a whole lot of folks burned up a whole lot of barrels in a hurry.

Fads make for a whole lot of quick, easy, "fast money" and are a means of trying to grab a big chunk of market share.

Greats like the 30-06, 300wm, 7mm RM are what build generations of loyalty and great service to the customer.

I think Hornady/Ruger are on the right track as I believe Nosler is but to more of a niche market.

Remington has screwed so many of us over the last 25 years or so with fads and poor quality control it may be a very long time if ever before they regain their position.

Winchester still seems to have a real problem with direction. They are suffering from stagnation and poor leadership.

 

[WildRose]

It was Winchester'a greatest marketing hyperboles when they introduced their "efficient" short, fat, and steep shoulder cartridges. I don't believe there is a shred of objective proof that it helps with velocity. But it remains one of those urban legends that will never die. Volume is absolute king...unless we discovered a way to cheat the laws of physics?

Not quite, case design, particularly the slope of the shoulder makes a very big difference.

The extreme example is the comparison of straight walled cartridges to bottlenecks with the same case volume.

I shoot the .375 Ruger and variants off of the same case as well as some of the very long cases such as the 7mm STW and Rum's.

I'm beginning to understand how case design comes into play in the equation.

 

[Deerhunter47]

I was never bitten by the short magnum bug either as I saw it purely as marketing hype.

Winchester really blew it with the WSSM line and a whole lot of folks burned up a whole lot of barrels in a hurry.

Fads make for a whole lot of quick, easy, "fast money" and are a means of trying to grab a big chunk of market share.

Greats like the 30-06, 300wm, 7mm RM are what build generations of loyalty and great service to the customer.

I think Hornady/Ruger are on the right track as I believe Nosler is but to more of a niche market.

Remington has screwed so many of us over the last 25 years or so with fads and poor quality control it may be a very long time if ever before they regain their position.

Winchester still seems to have a real problem with direction. They are suffering from stagnation and poor leadership.

WELL said, Wildrose!
More deer, elk and moose have be taken with a 30-30 and 30-06 than many other calibers combined. It's darn hard to argue with facts and history.

Deerhunter47

 

[WildRose]

WELL said, Wildrose!
More deer, elk and moose have be taken with a 30-30 and 30-06 than many other calibers combined. It's darn hard to argue with facts and history.

Deerhunter47

Yet some will try till they are blue in the face and then start right back up when they get their wind back.

 

[Bart B]

WELL said, Wildrose!
More deer, elk and moose have be taken with a 30-30 and 30-06 than many other calibers combined. It's darn hard to argue with facts and history.

Deerhunter47

Fact:
Game animals are put down with bullets, not cartridges.