The FAL Files  

Go Back   The FAL Files > Weapons Discussion > Ammunition

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old September 21, 2009, 23:32   #1
Psychomonkey
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 37628
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Vancouver, Wa
Posts: 137
Reloading using AP & API bullets

I recently came across some ap & api bullets and am wondering about the difference in the length of the rounds. I am looking to fire these through my STG58.

The bullets are:

.30 AP 163 grain bullet length is 1.40"
.30 cal API 155 grain bullet length is 1.41"
7.62 AP 147 grain bullet length is 1.295"

Given the differences in the bullets lengths, will I be dealing with a compressed load? I just want to make sure that when I go for the proper cartridge OAL that I don't have an over pressure situation waiting to go booooom!


Any help would be most appreciated.



Thanks,

John
Psychomonkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 22, 2009, 16:17   #2
ammolab
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 10923
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,840
Yes you will end up with a compressed load with those LONG for their weight bullets.

No big deal if you go CONSERVATIVE with your load. I use data for a HEAVIER bullet as a starting point for those long bullets.. Your 162gr 30-06 AP bullet would be safe with 180gr 7.62/308 data I would think.

Use Starting load data first...certainly not MAX load data and you should avoid a serious Overpressure incident.

Plenty of guys have loaded the 06 AP bullet in 7.62NATO...maybe they will share their loads with you.

What powder are you going to use?
ammolab is online now   Reply With Quote
Old September 22, 2009, 16:49   #3
brownknees
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 14917
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: mid atlantic
Posts: 11,989
IF you're using a stick type single base powder compressed charges are fine, a slong as they aren't an overload. Don't try compressing ball type (double base) powders though, that's a recipe for trouble even with "normal" bullets.
brownknees is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 22, 2009, 19:35   #4
ftierson
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 13827
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Colorado Springs, CO
Posts: 12,413
You won't end up with compressed loads if you use the 'right' powder.

I've reloaded many (thousands) of the US .30 CAL M2 AP bullets in 7.62x51mm, but have normally used the WC852 that was in the original LC53 ammo or H335.

With the WC852, you end up with a full case. With the H335 (older lots than current lots, so the charge was a little heavier than you'd want to use with the current stuff), the case is pretty full but not compressed.

I've also used the IMR4895 from SL53 .30 CAL AP ammo behind this same bullet reloaded in 7.62x51mm and, although the case was full, it wasn't particularly compressed.

I won't mention charge weights here because the only safe way to load this stuff is by using a chronograph and several good load books...

Most was loaded in US LC74 7.62x51mm NATO cases...

All loaded to a COL less than 2.800" (usually, about 2.795") for use through G3 magazines.

I should probably also mention that the .30 CAL M2 AP ammo that I pulled down to recover the bullets and powder from was from two lots (one from LC53 ammo and the other from SL53 ammo). The WC852 powder used in one and the IMR4895 powder used in the other might well have been at the quicker burning end of the range for this ammo. If slightly slower lots were used, it's certainly possible that you couldn't get your target velocity when used in 7.62x51mm ammo without needing to compress the powder charge. I'm just saying that I didn't need to do that with the stuff that I worked with...)

Forrest
ftierson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 22, 2009, 20:31   #5
onebigelf
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 32682
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: North Central Florida
Posts: 695
43.5 grains of WIN 748 COL 2.82" Using 163gr 30-06 AP projectiles. Note that this is NOT crimped at the cannelure. Performance is quite... respectable. Not a "hot" load. About 2600FPS.

John
__________________
Get OFF the sidelines!
If you are a veteran, the oath still holds.
Defend the constitution, or be forsworn!
onebigelf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 22, 2009, 21:02   #6
ammolab
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 10923
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,840
Quote:
Originally posted by ftierson
You won't end up with compressed loads if you use the 'right' powder.

I've reloaded many (thousands) of the US .30 CAL M2 AP bullets in 7.62x51mm, but have normally used the WC852 that was in the original LC53 ammo or H335.

With the WC852, you end up with a full case. With the H335 (older lots than current lots, so the charge was a little heavier than you'd want to use with the current stuff), the case is pretty full but not compressed.

I've also used the IMR4895 from SL53 .30 CAL AP ammo behind this same bullet reloaded in 7.62x51mm and, although the case was full, it wasn't particularly compressed.


Forrest
Forest: I am not clear on this... if you load a case "FULL" as you state with WC852 and or IMR 4895..how can you seat that LONG AP bullet to 2.80" without a compressed load? That bullet base qoes below the shoulder of a 7.62NATO case....Seems like Magic to me.
ammolab is online now   Reply With Quote
Old September 22, 2009, 22:00   #7
goldenspurholderx2
Registered
 
goldenspurholderx2's Avatar
 
FALaholic #: 18600
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: colorado springs, co
Posts: 1,818
I'm certain he means full, as in when his powder charge is in the brass and the bullet has been seated, the powder doesn't rattle around inside the cartridge. Full, but not compressed.
goldenspurholderx2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 22, 2009, 22:29   #8
ftierson
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 13827
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Colorado Springs, CO
Posts: 12,413
Quote:
Originally posted by goldenspurholderx2
I'm certain he means full, as in when his powder charge is in the brass and the bullet has been seated, the powder doesn't rattle around inside the cartridge. Full, but not compressed.
As usual, Dave makes crystal clear what I didn't...



Forrest
ftierson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 22, 2009, 23:04   #9
ftierson
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 13827
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Colorado Springs, CO
Posts: 12,413
Quote:
Originally posted by ammolab
Forest: I am not clear on this... if you load a case "FULL" as you state with WC852 and or IMR 4895..how can you seat that LONG AP bullet to 2.80" without a compressed load? That bullet base qoes below the shoulder of a 7.62NATO case....Seems like Magic to me.
WARNING WARNING WARNING

The loads listed below refer to powders that are no longer available in the form used to load these rounds and may be dangerous with current lots of H335 (which is considerably faster these days) and the IMR-4895 mentioned was never a commercially available canister powder so no comparison should be made to 4895 powders currently listed in loading manuals. If you use these data, you may end up blowing up your gun and blowing your head off...


You deserve a slightly more detailed axplanation than I've given thus far.

Originally, way back when, I purchased quite a bit of .30 CAL M2 AP (in Garand clips) in a couple of lots at the same time.

Since, back then, .308 surplus ammo was almost impossible to find and the .30-06 was dirt cheap, I pulled the .30-06 AP down for the bullets (and also resized many of the cases to 7.62x51mm).

As I pulled them down (LC53 and SL53 separately because they were loaded with different powders), I weighed each powder charge and if it varied within the target range for the same loading lot, I threw it all in a jug (of course, it was also visually inspected to see that it looked the same too before being added to the pile). Of course, I did this separately for the LC53 (WC-852) and SL-53 (IMR-4895).

Since I had chronographed this ammo before pulling it down, I could then compare charge weights and velocities in the manuals. I used this info to identify appropriate powder amounts and burn rates for the .308 (obviously, this must be done carefully and you must start low and work up).

Checking my records to answer this question reminds me of the problems we have with memory. Actually, I did not use the WC-852 to load these 163gr M2 AP bullets in .308, probably because it filled the case a little too much for the long bullets as you've mentioned. I used the WC-852 to load 150gr flat base spitzers in .308, and also to load M80 Ball bullets in .308. Since I never compress ball powders when loading, that means that the 147/150 bullets did not compress the WC-852.

I did use the pulled down IMR-4895 to load the 163gr M2 AP bullets, and I'm sure that I did not compress it either (I'm willing to compress a stick powder somewhat when loading a few rounds for hunting, but I won't do it when loading several hundred rounds at once). The load that I ended up using to hit my desired velocity in the LC74 cases (and reformed LC53 cases) was 40.5 grains of the military powder (for want of a better term, what I've called IMR4895 here).

The other powder that I used to load thousands of these bullets in .308 was H335. The load that I ended up with to get the desired velocity was 44.0 grains (lot 1 74 0). This powder charge filled about 95-98% of the volume inside the case when the bullet was seated (did not compress it).

For what it's worth...

Forrest
ftierson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 23, 2009, 13:49   #10
Psychomonkey
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 37628
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Vancouver, Wa
Posts: 137
Powder

I have IMR4064 which I use for my 150 grain FMJ rounds, all of which are fired through my STG58.

I also have some IMR4350 for the 175 Grain rounds for my Schmidt-Rubin K31.

I would like to find a load for the .30-06 API bullets, while being able to use a powder I already have. But if it isn't possible, whether for safety reasons, or poor perfomance; then I would buy another powder. I don't require match level performance as my rifle is not sub-MOA. It is more a minute of pie-plate battle rifle.

Thanks in advance for the help.


John
Psychomonkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 23, 2009, 14:15   #11
daschnoz
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 20534
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 776
45gr of BL-C(2) under the 163gr AP works well in .308 - I'm just saying
__________________
7.62NATO - because shooting something twice with 5.56NATO is just plain silly.
-------------------------------------------------
daschnoz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 27, 2009, 21:36   #12
aardq
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 18645
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Flint Area
Posts: 1,271
Or you can use the "Mexican Match" method. Pull the bullets from loaded rounds, leave the powder intact, and just seat the AP bullet into the case. Works well as long as both types of bullets weigh within a few grains. ie. 147gr, and 150gr.

Dan

Sorry, just re-read the original post and the bullet weights may be too different for the "Mexican Match." I'd still check a couple of reloading manuals for the listed charges between saw 150 and 163. If not the same powder charges then this idea won't work.
aardq is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 28, 2009, 07:47   #13
ammolab
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 10923
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,840
Quote:
Originally posted by aardq
Or you can use the "Mexican Match" method. Pull the bullets from loaded rounds, leave the powder intact, and just seat the AP bullet into the case. Works well as long as both types of bullets weigh within a few grains. ie. 147gr, and 150gr.

Dan

Sorry, just re-read the original post and the bullet weights may be too different for the "Mexican Match." I'd still check a couple of reloading manuals for the listed charges between saw 150 and 163. If not the same powder charges then this idea won't work.
You can't just take the "weight" of the bullet (163gr) into the picture for 30-06 AP bullets in 7.62NATO reloads....you must consider the fact that this bullet is MUCH LONGER than a 163 or 168gr Lead core projectile. It will take up a LOT of case volume and could raise pressures quite a bit more than a 168gr lead core bullet.

Just be carefull and work up a load.
ammolab is online now   Reply With Quote
Old September 28, 2009, 15:55   #14
ftierson
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 13827
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Colorado Springs, CO
Posts: 12,413
Quote:
Originally posted by ammolab
You can't just take the "weight" of the bullet (163gr) into the picture for 30-06 AP bullets in 7.62NATO reloads....you must consider the fact that this bullet is MUCH LONGER than a 163 or 168gr Lead core projectile. It will take up a LOT of case volume and could raise pressures quite a bit more than a 168gr lead core bullet.

Just be carefull and work up a load.
What ammolab says...

In addition to potential problems with the longer bullet taking up more volume in the cartridge case when seated to the same overall length as shorter bullets, you also increase the bearing surface of bullets as you make them longer for the same weight (which is why some current copper bullets are ribbed (which is designed to control for the increased bearing surface)). This is especially a factor to consider when you load some of the newer homogeneous (non-lead core) bullets, which are very long for the same weight as lead core bullets. The increase in bearing surface (and the fact that the homogeneous copper (or whatever material) bullet may be slightly harder than a traditional guilding metal jacketed lead-cored bullet) usually means that the powder charge must be adjusted compared to traditional bullets. This adjustment is indicated by the fact that most current loading manuals include additional, different reloading data for the newer types of bullets.

Also, if you use longer-than-normal-for-weight bullets, you may well find you you need a faster twisted bore to stabilize them...

Forrest
ftierson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 28, 2009, 19:41   #15
MakNorinco
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 29380
Join Date: May 2007
Location: INDIANA
Posts: 915
Is it even legal to assemble AP rounds in .308 using REAL AP .308 bullets(intended to be loaded for .308 in the first place, not 30-06)?


Obviously, you can use the M2 30-06 30cal bullets as they are EXEMPT(even though they are AP).


I know there was that whole "not loading AP rounds" that can be fired in a pistol(IE Vector 51 .308 pistol, olympic arms 7.62x39 pistol).

Just curious...
__________________
Originally posted by Ssarge
Yeah, that really pissed me off when the German's bombed Pearl Harbor!
MakNorinco is online now   Reply With Quote
Old September 28, 2009, 23:15   #16
Psychomonkey
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 37628
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Vancouver, Wa
Posts: 137
loading .30-06 163 gr in .308

So anyone know if either IMR 4064 or IMR 4350 would work ok in a load using the 163 gr api in a .308 casing?
Psychomonkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 28, 2009, 23:41   #17
ftierson
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 13827
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Colorado Springs, CO
Posts: 12,413
Re: loading .30-06 163 gr in .308

Quote:
Originally posted by Psychomonkey
So anyone know if either IMR 4064 or IMR 4350 would work ok in a load using the 163 gr api in a .308 casing?
Depends on what you mean by "work ok."

Both will make the bullet leave the barrel, but performance will certainly not be up to snuff, especially with IMR 4350.

IMR 4350 is too slow...

IMR 4064 is on the edge...

If you check out Hodgdon's online loading data, you'll see that a top load for IMR 4064 with a 168gr HPBT bullet gives you a compressed load. Seating the 163gr M2 AP bullet will present even greater problems.

You need a slightly quicker powder for this combination (.30 CAL M2 AP bullet in .308 Win.).

Forrest
ftierson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 30, 2009, 16:55   #18
moonbat60
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 17000
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Midwest
Posts: 3,116
I've had pretty good experiences with Alliant's ( former Hercules Powders )
RL-15, which is IMHO one of the best powders for reloading .308.

I'm not giving any charge weight recommendations here, as charge weights can be looked up online or in just about any reloading manual.



Pete
moonbat60 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old September 30, 2009, 17:58   #19
onebigelf
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 32682
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: North Central Florida
Posts: 695
I also like Varget (very accurate) and Ramshot TAC for the .308

John
__________________
Get OFF the sidelines!
If you are a veteran, the oath still holds.
Defend the constitution, or be forsworn!
onebigelf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 30, 2009, 19:29   #20
jerrymrc
Registered
 
jerrymrc's Avatar
 
FALaholic #: 2331
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: colorado springs
Posts: 4,983
Quote:
Originally posted by MakNorinco
Is it even legal to assemble AP rounds in .308 using REAL AP .308 bullets(intended to be loaded for .308 in the first place, not 30-06)?


Obviously, you can use the M2 30-06 30cal bullets as they are EXEMPT(even though they are AP).


I know there was that whole "not loading AP rounds" that can be fired in a pistol(IE Vector 51 .308 pistol, olympic arms 7.62x39 pistol).

Just curious...
Yes. Just can't sell them.
jerrymrc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 30, 2009, 19:36   #21
Psychomonkey
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 37628
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Vancouver, Wa
Posts: 137
Powder

I would think that if IMR 4350 is too slow, and IMR 4064 is "on the edge". Then I would need something slower than 4064, but faster burning that the 4350. Based on other posts in this thread. Many people are using something between these two powders. Am I missing some important detail. I was taught that going to a slower burning powder allows you to use a heavier bullet (assuming the powder charge hasn't changed) as it doesn't build pressure so quickly, which could cause am over pressure situation. As for my choice of words when I asked if either powder would "work O.K.", I fully understand that a few grains can send a bullet down the bore.
I had hoped that someone here had loaded these rounds in a .308 and could share some load data.

John
Psychomonkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 30, 2009, 19:52   #22
ftierson
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 13827
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Colorado Springs, CO
Posts: 12,413
Re: Powder

Quote:
Originally posted by Psychomonkey
I would think that if IMR 4350 is too slow, and IMR 4064 is "on the edge". Then I would need something slower than 4064, but faster burning that the 4350. Based on other posts in this thread. Many people are using something between these two powders. Am I missing some important detail. I was taught that going to a slower burning powder allows you to use a heavier bullet (assuming the powder charge hasn't changed) as it doesn't build pressure so quickly, which could cause am over pressure situation. As for my choice of words when I asked if either powder would "work O.K.", I fully understand that a few grains can send a bullet down the bore.
I had hoped that someone here had loaded these rounds in a .308 and could share some load data.

John
IMR 4064 is on the edge of being too slow, not too fast...

You need something a little faster than IMR 4064...

Forrest
ftierson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 01, 2009, 09:24   #23
ammolab
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 10923
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,840
Re: Re: Powder

Quote:
Originally posted by ftierson


IMR 4064 is on the edge of being too slow, not too fast...

You need something a little faster than IMR 4064...

Forrest
to further explain:

The "faster powder" will get you to your wanted velocity with a smaller charge...thus you will not have to worry about compression of the powder as much.

It will also get you to the PRESSURE LIMIT of your cartridge sooner than a "slower powder" too......

It is always a compromise so: LOAD WITH CAUTION guys!
ammolab is online now   Reply With Quote
Old October 01, 2009, 10:30   #24
ftierson
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 13827
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Colorado Springs, CO
Posts: 12,413
Re: Re: Re: Powder

Quote:
Originally posted by ammolab


to further explain:

The "faster powder" will get you to your wanted velocity with a smaller charge...thus you will not have to worry about compression of the powder as much.

It will also get you to the PRESSURE LIMIT of your cartridge sooner than a "slower powder" too......

It is always a compromise so: LOAD WITH CAUTION guys!
Yup to all...

But especially to the last...

And a "faster powder" getting to your pressure limit sooner than a "slower powder" simply (for our purposes here) means that you will use less powder for the same pressure.

Forrest
ftierson is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 00:54.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©1998-2012 The FAL Files