Okay, I get to eat a little crow today. I looked over the 1895 report from Ordnance which says they are looking at various powders and are willing to accept lots of powder making 38,000 normal and 45,000 when hot. SAAMI's 40,000 for the .30 Krag is, then, reasonable. Regardless, my rolling block won't see over 33,000; there is no back-up locking lug on this rifle.

For what it's worth, Ordnance reports they used only Peyton powder through June of '95, but they had on order Leonard and DuPont powders. Tests were showing the NG content of Leonard was eroding barrels; Peyton was mostly NC and causing no problems. That Peyton was a slow powder is indicated by the complaints of unburned residue filling the locking lug's recess and causing jams.

A question: How "dirty" is 4350 when used in a .30-40-220? My .30-37-180 loads of 4895 are fairly clean.

Interesting was the note they were preparing to test 120 gn .22 caliber ammunition.

The report for Frankford through mid-1898 says they are still using as much Peyton as any other powder for the Krag. DuPont contracts are equally large, and WA from L&R is also being loaded but not in the quantities of Peyton and DuPont. Mean pressures with the latest lots of Peyton are 35,000 and 38,000 maximum. Various tests indicate it is of different composition than earlier lots. They report the granules are soft enough to crush with your fingernails.

The DuPont powder being employed makes higher pressures for 2000 fps, with means near 38,000. (More crow for me.) WA was more like 36,000.

The Wikipedia says the CPW plant was destroyed in an explosion in 1898, so this was likely the last year Frankford will include a report on Peyton. Given the previous erosion reports on the DuPont powder, I suspect 1899 was the year WA became the predominant powder in the .30 Krag, but I don't have the report for that year.

I finally "worked up" my 220 gn load. From Lyman's data, previous chronograph readings for my 180 gn load, and QuickLoad pressure and fps estimates (which are inaccurate at these pressures, but help gauge barrel length changes), I started at 35.0 gn of 4895 (with Remington 9.5 primers) and got fps readings both sides of the desired 2000 fps in my 30" barrel. Thus ends my "working up," until I run out of this bottle of 4895. Pressures should be 31000 to 32000, which makes me feel better--it is just a rolling block. I wouldn't call it a squeaky clean burn, but it's clean enough.

I found interesting the 220 is a relatively mild recoiling load. My butt stock is done in an older style, with the end grain mildly checkered and no plate or pad. My boney teenager was whimpering about the recoil, but I found it quite tolerable. My previous 180 gn load is a bit sharper in recoil, probably because higher speeds mean a shorter thus more abrupt recoil. Compared to the 180, the 220 is in the direction of shove and away from sharp, not that either load is a prime example of shove or sharp.

My rifle is only 6-3/4 lb, and original fps is all I'll care for. It's a grand old cartridge. I was a bit worried to see Remington and Winchester brass supplies dry up, but others have stepped in to the market (at a higher price). I think it's a keeper.

Next up: A reduced recoil 125 gn load for my boney teenager.

   Karl

i use a 165gr ranch dog(about 173gr) and 25.5gr of h4198, goes around 1800fps. they are a deer's worst nitemare.

(You need to Login to view media files and links)

the right and the left boolits are 165gr rd
(You need to Login to view media files and links)