There's many different variables that affect powders and pressures differently including what cartridge the powder is burned in and particular bullets used with a particular cartridge. Going down that road would never end. Bottom line is be at least a little respectful approaching max published data.
A Return to the 30-06
- Thread starter Double Dropper
- Start date
TackDriver284
Handloader
- Feb 13, 2016
- 2,534
- 2,056
This
and common sense.
Guy Miner
Master Loader
- Apr 6, 2006
- 17,755
- 5,850
The highest velocity 30-06, 165 grain load that I've seen published from a reputable source, in this case Hodgdon:
The good ol' 30-06 need not be stuck with traditional velocity, though that works just fine.
Interestingly, Nosler has long shown a RL-22 load at 3002 fps, but I've never been able to reach that speed with RL-22 and the listed charge weight.
Regards, Guy
The good ol' 30-06 need not be stuck with traditional velocity, though that works just fine.
Interestingly, Nosler has long shown a RL-22 load at 3002 fps, but I've never been able to reach that speed with RL-22 and the listed charge weight.
Regards, Guy
And SAMMI lists 60K max pressure, recommendation???? And Hodgdon load from Guyminer is pushing the envelope??? Why would they push it that far if it wasn’t safe? As Shadetree (Jack O'Conner and l) said, depending on load (components) and rifle, is the tell tale signs. Some can handle the pressure some can’t.
Manufacturers Pressure tests are alot more than SAMMI limits. Heck l know nut jobs who loaded 3 grains past max on thier Weatherbys, stupid, and… never had a problem . Think ol Roy didn’t factor that in , with a long free bore? l would never exceed max on anything. But approaching a max load or being worried about it? No reservations at all. The ONLY problem l ever had was jamming a bullet into the lands and had primer pockets open excessively. The accuracy was excellent, disappointed yes, but wasn’t worth it. The only other issue l had was an old 03 Springfeild with excess headspace and had head separations. A long free bore lm sure was the safeguard.
So yeah l get the safety thing 100%, but in the case of the 4895 thing, proceed with caution that’s all.
Last edited:
"H4895 has additives that make it temperature stable, IMR4895 is not. They are not the same powders"
True. At one time they were considered the same and data could be shared. One of the thing confusing the issue is C.U.P. vs P.S.I. They are not the same and probably will never be. I'll stick with P.S.I. where the MAP for the 30-06 is 60KPSI. MAP. The changes in copmosition may make a difference.
Data is presented as such. yet, cartridges such as the .270 Win. are loaded to a higher level, somewhere around 63KPSI to 65KPSI. Can anyone tell me why it shouldn't be done in the 30-06 which has always been kept by SAAMO low do to some older rifles like the early 1903 Springfields. I load several of my 30-06 rifles to 2800 FPS with 180 gr. bullets from 22" barrels without a problem.
Just my not very humble opinion, but I would not try for top velocity with any bullet from 150 gr. on up to 220 gr. with any of the 4895s or equivelant. They're a medium burning rate powder and should be loaded as such. Also, BEWARE of data in earlier load manuals. I have Lyman loading manuals from the mid 50s that shot starting loads with 4895 as 51.0 gr. The latest Lyman manual I have on hand is #50 and they show 51.0 gr. H4895 to me the maximum. Back then 4895 wa H4895 milsuro and load data was always included when you bought a bag from the drum. Bag was marked, "use data for 3031, or from 4064 or 4320, as the powder varied that much from drum to drum or lot from lot. Later Hodgden blended it into one homogenous lot which was close to IMR 4895. At first they were considered interchangeable. Even when it was interchangeable I usually found a variance of plus or minus grain at max loads.
Case in point. For a very long time my pet load in a brand new J.C. Higgins was a max of 49.0 gr. H4895 with the 150 gr. Sierra now called Pro-Hunter. AFAIK, they were not called that back in the mid 50s. Just could be memory failure but the load was not. I never knew what the velocity was as no chronographs available back then and if the were, I probably couldn't afford to buy one. As I still own that particular rifle I loaded up a box starting with 47.0 gr. up to 49.0 gr., the max for that rifle back around 1955/6. Bolt was a bit stiff at 48.0 gr. and at 49.0 I had to open the bolt with a 2x4 on the bolt handle. It was a typical Tucson summer day so about 103 in the shade. Technically, the same rifle, same load. What were the differences.? One, fresh powder not blended milsurp. Temperature about 103, not the probably 65 to 70 degrees back in the San Francisco bay Area. Never did find out what the velocity was from that load but I don't use that bullet anymore as it was too messy on eating meat.
What I suggest the OP do is work up to that lower posted load. If everything is OK, then carefully work up to that higher max a half grain at a time until bolt becomes slightly stiff, then back off a full grain. Do it on a hot day as pressure will show quicker and any load should/will be same come hunting season. That's how I would go about it. Guns ain't real cheap these days and body parts even more dear.
Paul B.
True. At one time they were considered the same and data could be shared. One of the thing confusing the issue is C.U.P. vs P.S.I. They are not the same and probably will never be. I'll stick with P.S.I. where the MAP for the 30-06 is 60KPSI. MAP. The changes in copmosition may make a difference.
Data is presented as such. yet, cartridges such as the .270 Win. are loaded to a higher level, somewhere around 63KPSI to 65KPSI. Can anyone tell me why it shouldn't be done in the 30-06 which has always been kept by SAAMO low do to some older rifles like the early 1903 Springfields. I load several of my 30-06 rifles to 2800 FPS with 180 gr. bullets from 22" barrels without a problem.
Just my not very humble opinion, but I would not try for top velocity with any bullet from 150 gr. on up to 220 gr. with any of the 4895s or equivelant. They're a medium burning rate powder and should be loaded as such. Also, BEWARE of data in earlier load manuals. I have Lyman loading manuals from the mid 50s that shot starting loads with 4895 as 51.0 gr. The latest Lyman manual I have on hand is #50 and they show 51.0 gr. H4895 to me the maximum. Back then 4895 wa H4895 milsuro and load data was always included when you bought a bag from the drum. Bag was marked, "use data for 3031, or from 4064 or 4320, as the powder varied that much from drum to drum or lot from lot. Later Hodgden blended it into one homogenous lot which was close to IMR 4895. At first they were considered interchangeable. Even when it was interchangeable I usually found a variance of plus or minus grain at max loads.
Case in point. For a very long time my pet load in a brand new J.C. Higgins was a max of 49.0 gr. H4895 with the 150 gr. Sierra now called Pro-Hunter. AFAIK, they were not called that back in the mid 50s. Just could be memory failure but the load was not. I never knew what the velocity was as no chronographs available back then and if the were, I probably couldn't afford to buy one. As I still own that particular rifle I loaded up a box starting with 47.0 gr. up to 49.0 gr., the max for that rifle back around 1955/6. Bolt was a bit stiff at 48.0 gr. and at 49.0 I had to open the bolt with a 2x4 on the bolt handle. It was a typical Tucson summer day so about 103 in the shade. Technically, the same rifle, same load. What were the differences.? One, fresh powder not blended milsurp. Temperature about 103, not the probably 65 to 70 degrees back in the San Francisco bay Area. Never did find out what the velocity was from that load but I don't use that bullet anymore as it was too messy on eating meat.
What I suggest the OP do is work up to that lower posted load. If everything is OK, then carefully work up to that higher max a half grain at a time until bolt becomes slightly stiff, then back off a full grain. Do it on a hot day as pressure will show quicker and any load should/will be same come hunting season. That's how I would go about it. Guns ain't real cheap these days and body parts even more dear.
Paul B.
flyingagg
Handloader
- Dec 16, 2019
- 462
- 479
A lot of good information here. The other thing to add about old reloading manual data, I actually reached out to Hodgdon about such a case asking if the powders have changed. Their response was that powders are the same, except from the lot to lot difference, but primers have changed significantly and that’s why the reduced maximums
Last edited:
TXbaldhunter
Handloader
- May 12, 2007
- 404
- 331
Another reason some of the 30-06 loads are reduced is because they are sometimes used in automatic rifles.Some of my Hornady manuals have a special listing for the M-1 Garand.Max loads with 165-168gr bullets are running 2700fps,where the regular 30-06 listing with the same weight bullets running up to 2900fps.The Garand listing didn't show the slower burnrate powders.Varget and 4064 burnrate powders where shown as the slower powders for the Garand.Factory loads are usually made to accommodate all rifle safely.The handloader can use different and newer powder and safely achieve some amazing results in this amazing cartridge.
Alaska
Handloader
- Aug 20, 2006
- 943
- 379
In Rem 740
Start with RCBS Small base sizer die
IMR 4895 @ 50.0 with 150gr
And 48. 0 with 165gr and 47.0 with 175gr
30-06
Mine prefers the Speer Hot Cor Spitzers bullets
I always apply a crimp using the Lee Factory Crimp Die
Start with RCBS Small base sizer die
IMR 4895 @ 50.0 with 150gr
And 48. 0 with 165gr and 47.0 with 175gr
30-06
Mine prefers the Speer Hot Cor Spitzers bullets
I always apply a crimp using the Lee Factory Crimp Die
