Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 [2]  Send TopicPrint
 10 Summary on W.A. .30 (Read 574 times)
Parashooter
KCA Forum Member
*
Offline


Kragmudgeon

Posts: 443
Location: Connecticut
Joined: Feb 4th, 2010
Re: Summary on W.A. .30
Reply #15 - Jun 11th, 2019 at 4:32am
Print Post  
butlersrangers wrote on Jun 10th, 2019 at 11:07pm:
. . . It would be interesting to see comparative results of 220 grain (projectile) loads using 4895 and 4350.

See reply #7 of this topic, at least for charge/velocity/pressure.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
butlersrangers
KCA Forum Member
*
Offline


Krag Enthusiast!

Posts: 4903
Location: Michigan Bi-Peninsular&Proud
Joined: Oct 7th, 2009
Re: Summary on W.A. .30
Reply #16 - Jun 11th, 2019 at 5:06pm
Print Post  
I should have been more specific and said: comparing 'accuracy results' between loads using 220 grain projectiles and 4350 & 4895 propellants.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
psteinmayer
KCA Forum Member
*
Offline


Krag Enthusiast!

Posts: 2135
Location: Ypsilanti, Michgan
Joined: Aug 30th, 2011
Gender: Male
Re: Summary on W.A. .30
Reply #17 - Jun 11th, 2019 at 11:17pm
Print Post  
Well, I know how I can group off the bench with the 4350 loads.  I'm planning on heading to the range Sunday (Island Lake, Chuck) to work on my 03A3 LR ammo.  Perhaps I'll load up some rounds on Saturday and take my Krag too.  If they proved to be as accurate or better, then that's what I'll take to the Roosevelt Match too! 

By the way, I think there is a slight difference between IMR and H 4895s.  IMR granules are black, while H granules are more brownish in color.  Also, I think the H granules are more uniform in appearance too!  According to the burn rate chart I looked at, H4895 burns near the same rate as IMR 4064... which is slightly slower than IMR 4895.
  
Back to top
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 [2] 
Send TopicPrint
 
  « Board Index ‹ Board  ^Top