LlanoEstacado
Member
I am trying to work up a hunting load for my .308. Components are:
1. once fired brass from military surplus ammo I have fired
2. Barnes 165 gr. TSX BTHP
3. CCI Large Rifle primers
4. H4895 powder
It was hard for me to find data for the TSX - I finally located a Barnes reloading Manual. It suggested a little over 40 grains of H4895 for a starting load. I loaded some at 40 grains. The first round would not eject. When I got home, I opened the bolt and tapped it with a rubber mallet, extracting/ejecting the spent case. Primer showed pressure signs (cupped) and every dimension I could measure on the case was a little larger than the spent mil-surp ammo.
OK. Obvious too much pressure. The case does not show any splits/signs of head separation. the neck is indented on opposing sides at the end, rounded normally the rest of the neck.
Question: Where to I go from here? I was thinking of backing off 2 or 2 1/2 grains and see how that works. I am assuming the mil-surp is the reason for the higher pressure (thicker walls, less case capacity). Does that approach sound reasonable?
1. once fired brass from military surplus ammo I have fired
2. Barnes 165 gr. TSX BTHP
3. CCI Large Rifle primers
4. H4895 powder
It was hard for me to find data for the TSX - I finally located a Barnes reloading Manual. It suggested a little over 40 grains of H4895 for a starting load. I loaded some at 40 grains. The first round would not eject. When I got home, I opened the bolt and tapped it with a rubber mallet, extracting/ejecting the spent case. Primer showed pressure signs (cupped) and every dimension I could measure on the case was a little larger than the spent mil-surp ammo.
OK. Obvious too much pressure. The case does not show any splits/signs of head separation. the neck is indented on opposing sides at the end, rounded normally the rest of the neck.
Question: Where to I go from here? I was thinking of backing off 2 or 2 1/2 grains and see how that works. I am assuming the mil-surp is the reason for the higher pressure (thicker walls, less case capacity). Does that approach sound reasonable?