Gunboards Forums banner

1 - 4 of 4 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
477 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
From da blog:

http://fingolfen.blogspot.com/

Friend of mine gave me a copy of the August-September 2008 issue of Handloader Magazine. You can get a preview PDF online, but this issue is a must for any fan of World War II military surplus rifles. Starting on page 42 is a great article by Mike Venturino on hand loading cartridges that reasonably mimic World War II Military Loads.

All of the usual suspects are included from the ubiquitous .30-06, to the .303 British, 8x75mm German Mauser, 7.62x54R Soviet, and even the 6.5mm and 7.7mm Japanese. Sorry Italian fans, no 6.5mm Carcano or 7.35mm Carcano. Mike details the variations in bore diameter that make hand loading for a military surplus rifle challenging (including the fact that most reloading guides call for .308 bullets for 7.62x54R when most should really be .311).

All in all this is a neat article with lots of recipes and shot groupings achieved with the various loads. I’m planning on trying out some of these (or variations of them) soon as I’m always tweaking the loads in my M1 Garand, Nagants, and others.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,962 Posts
I did my own carcano 7.35 ammo research. I found that 1939 dated 7.35 ammo chronographed out at @2400 FPS and was very consistent, average spread was only 50 FPS high to low. My reloads were shooting out at 2200fps. So I have a little more work to do on them. I'm a big fan of the 7.35 caliber rifles. Nice rifle to collect lots of variation and the caliber keeps lots of people away from them. Its real easy reload for me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
699 Posts
That is a really bad article. Old Mike really has no idea what he is doing . Most all of his information is incorrect [ just look at his section on German 8mm ] , he has no idea how European bore and bullets were made to work . He is clearly a rank beginner on reloading for old military rifles and makes all the beginner mistakes , like the best accuracy is to use the "same" weight and style bullet . Most of his loads are about the worst combinations of bullets and powder . I also doubt some of his shooting results . I have personaly see more than a few " gun writers " shooting at 25 or 50 yards and print the same targets in their articles as 100 yards results . I will put the results my 100,000's of test fired rounds through over 1200 different rifles against his 500 rounds through about 20 rifles anytime. Sorry to be so negitive but poor articles like that is the reason all the old bad information just will not go away . mag
 
1 - 4 of 4 Posts
Top