Indians For Guns

For me:

Likes:

6mm Norma BR: Supremely accurate at 300m to 1000 m, will give the 6PPC a run for its money
6 PPC: Group under 300?
30 BR: Score domination
.22LR; Fun to plink to supremely accurate at 50 M
8mm Mauser: including 8x60S, 8x64 et al, outperform or match 30-06
.338 Lapua Magnum: want to shoot to 1500 meters accurately?
.22-250: Flat to 400 meters. 3000+ fps
7.62x39: Ak/Vz/Krinkov anyone?
.300 WM: In a light rifle if you like recoil
.260 REM: Outperform flavor of the day like 6.5x47 lapua or 6 Grendel
.222 Rem mag: Rub the .223 nose as far as accuracy goes
7.5 Swiss: The STGW57 makes it worthwhile, not even considering accuracy.

Dislikes:
.375 Anything: I dont hunt dangerous game
.4XX: why bother. Dynasours are extinct
.50 BMG: I dont need to shoot a jeep at the end of the universe
.243 Win: Barrel life
.270, .280 etc: Why bother: .260 will do or out perform
.22 Anything other than LR: Why bother?

Indifferent:

7.62x54R: Inherrently inaccurate
6 mm BRX, Dasher etc: Why bother for 100 fps?
.308: Accuracy wise what does it do that the 6 BR doesnt outperform? Power: .300 WM
.223: The AR platform.. need I say more
.30-06: Other than the Garand, why bother?
.300 WSM et al.. : Why?


What about you?

Great thread MoA.Thanks for starting this.

Likes:

.22lr- Plinking,target practice,sheer versatility of its application in hunting etc.

.17HMR- All that the .22lr does and much more fun.

.243- A very versatile cartridge- I am not into varminting or that kind of thing.But,if needs be,I can shoot from ground hogs,foxes (I do not like the idea even though it is necessary sometimes)to upto Red Deer,Eland sized game.Accurate and soft recoiling.

6.5X55- The little Swede is a classic round whose size belies its great potential as a hunting round.Inherently accurate,soft recoiling,great penetration-deer,pigs.elk or Moose.No problem.

.275 Rigby/7X57 Mauser- All that the Swede is and slightly bigger.Great history.W.D.M.Bell aka Karamoja Bell shot elephants in excess of a thousand with this cartridge. Jim Corbett shot the Man Eating Leopard of RudraPrayag with this cartridge.I have no intention of hunting either game.

30/06- One of the most versatile cartridges. Competition shooting to hunting.High sectional density and vast range of bullet weights make it probably the most versatile hunting round.

.303- Classic round and no other reason than it's the first centrefire cartridge I cut my teeth on.There is nothing that this great round has not taken.

.338 Lapua Magnum- Great long distance shooting/sniping cartridge.

9.3X62/9.3X74R- Great driven boar cartridge,ideal upto cape buffalo.

.375 H&H- Again, it is said that there is nothing on this planet that cannot be hunted with this classic.With a light 200gr bullet you have similar trajectory of a 180gr 30/06 and with a 300gr bullet you can take elephants and cape buffalo if you wish.

.416 Rigby- Flat shooting,accurate,great history,classic cartridge.The biggest and baddest of them all are not a problem.

.470NE- If you want to go against the Big Five with a double rifle, start here.

.500 Jeffery- The last practical round that I would want in a bolt action rifle against the big five-if I ever have to go against them.

.600NE and .700NE- Not for any other reason but why not.

.577 Trex- When I want to indulge in some masochistic pleasures.

.50BMG- For ultra long range shooting with more dander und blitzen.

There are some more cartridges that I like but it gets too long.You may question the choice of predominantly sporting cartridges.Though I am pro-hunting, I am not into piling up carcases of animals. But,I like them for what they are. I will also look at some competition specific calibres when I want to take it up but they are not my passion.

Dislikes-

Most of the magnums and ultra magnums,especially after the .300 mark.

Indifferent:

Most of the military cartridges and the .270 Win.

Will come back when I get a few more ideas.

Best-
Vikram

I hesitate to post this, because it may sound like I'm disagreeing with others, but I'm not. I decided to post my response because I think it reflects well, why there are so many cartridges: because people shoot for so many different reasons and have so many different interests. So, here's a little list from me:

.22 LR: Everyone's favorite, because it's cheap, accurate, and suited to so many different situations, like indoor shooting.

.30-'06: It's almost unpopular to like this very popular cartridge. I like it because there's such a great many bullets available in .308", and because so much research has been done with it. In other words, a lot of information is available for it and it's suitable for many situations.

.270: In my Ruger #1, it's very accurate, flat shooting, and can be used in a great many situations, all the way from varmints up to fairly large, non-dangerous game. It makes a better varmint caliber than the .30-06, in that, where the 130 gr bullet in .308 is not optimal, a 130 gr boat tail in .270 is dandy for long range, windy conditions, such as what one finds in the mountains, when rockchuck shooting.

.45-70: big bores may not be everyone's cup of tea, but what they do really well is shoot cast bullets, which is why I have kept my .45-70 reloading supplies, even after giving that gun to my older son.

7.62x54r: The Finns seem to have made this caliber quite successful in their target rifles based on the old Mosin Nagant action, keeping this round relevant into the 80s. (However, in Finland, it's known as the 7.62x53r.) Undoubtedly, messing with old Mosin Nagant actions is just as much of an exercise in futility as messing with SMLEs, when it comes to ultimate accuracy, but for some, including me, it is fun and rewarding:





TKIV 85

Finnish Army Weapons

These rifles come from a long line of 7.62x54r - Mosin Nagant development by the Finns:



Like these M39s, which are like mine.

One very nice thing about 7.62x54r right now where I'm at is the availability of low-cost surplus ammo for practice and plinking. No other high power centerfire can be shot as cheaply at this time, as you can see from this ad (which, BTW, isn't the cheapest available ammo):

Polish 7.62x54R 440rd Can 1950s Light Ball

I will admit, my M39 seems to prefer heavy ball (~ 170 gr, as opposed to ~ 145 gr), but at this price, who can gripe? There's no doubt that, if one wishes to get into the milsurp (what military surplus is called over here) bolt action shooting game, the Swiss K-31 is the way to go, especially the later ones with the ugly blond beech stock. The machine work on them is a thing of beauty, I will admit. However, there's two strikes against them in my book: First, the 7.5 mm ammo is superbly accurate for common ordinary military surplus, but it's outrageously expensive. (Reloading for milsurp shooting contests usually puts one in the next higher level of competition.) The second strike against the K-31 for me is that, even more than milsurp M98s, they are made on the "one size fits all" plan, which includes the shortest midgets in Switzerland. There are also some who prefer a nice M96 Swede in 6.5x55, but to me they are too vanilla and boring. But the M39 is often regarded as a "Jack the Giant Killer," due to its inherent accuracy. For the guy who wants to buy and shoot on a budget in this game, the M39 is a real blessing, especially to someone who wants a milsurp bolt action that has a stock proportioned for someone my size.

The 203 gr soft point Barnaul ammo in 7.62x54r is very accurate in my M39, and what I shot for competition. (The lowest level requires either milsurp or commercial ammo -- no handloads.) In fact, in my M39, this cheap-looking steel case ammo easily outshot the fancy (and expensive) Sellier & Ballot Match Boat Tail Hollow Point ammo. (At least I got some reloadable brass out of those boxes.) Also, I wouldn't hesitate to use the 203 gr Barnaul for hunting, either!

6.5x55: I have to agree, a little Swede carbine I once had was a dandy shooting little rifle.

.30 H&H: There are hotter shooting .30 Magnums -- I guess I don't much care for any of them. For one thing, the belt is superfluous on them, since there is an ample neck for them to headspace on. The taper of this one makes the belt serve a useful purpose! Why do I like it? Well, I just do. I'd love to have an old Remington 30 or 30s in .30 H&H, since most of the work to remove the ugly enfield sight and magazine belly has already been done, and the Enfield action is more than long enough and strong enough for these long cartridges (which isn't necessarily true for the M98).

.375 H&H: I also like this one for the same reason as the .30, but also because it has long seemed to me to be an ideal candidate for shooting cast bullets.

.425 Westley Richards: The big deal to this one is its ability to offer African dangerous big game capabilities in a standard length M98 action (unlike the .375 H&H, which requires lengthening and therefore weakening the M98). The use of a rebated case even made the need for opening the bolt face up unnecessary, since it's the same diameter as the 8x57/.30-'06 case rim. My interest has to do with it's potential for cast bullet shooting.

6.3x53r: This is the necked down "varmint" version of the 7.62x54r. It's pretty popular in Finland, Russia, the Baltics, etc. If chamber reamers were more available for this one in the USA, I'd be very interested in making up a nice varmint rifle on one of my Mosin Nagant actions.

Regarding the "what I don't like" category, I'd have to say, "None." There are plenty of cartridges I'm not interested in, but I can't say I've run across any I don't like.

Re 6.3x53R: "It's pretty popular in Finland, Russia, the Baltics, etc." It is, in fact, practically unknown outside of Finland, and obsolete there since the 1950s. Ballistically it's a twin to the .250 Savage. It's use was mainly for hunting large game birds like black grouse and capercaille, birds that cannot be readily approached to within shotgun range. I'm sure it took fur bearers as well. It was replaced by the .222 Remington.

As to "Russia, the Baltics, etc.", i.e. the Soviet Union, possession of rifles was tightly controlled. They developed their own cartridges on the necked-down, or necked-up, 7.62x54R case for hunting and sport. But no 6.3mm/.257".

Whoops, sorry, yes, Soviet & Baltic rifles use a 6.5mm bullet, (.264), not 6.3mm (.257). The 6.5x54r was available commercially.

6.3x53r loads are still listed in the Vihtavuori reloading manual (http://membres.multimania.fr/shooter/vitha/63x53r.html) and Finns still discuss barrels and chambering for the load, which is (as can be seen from the loading data) "a twin to the .250 Savage."

Regarding the 6.5x54r Soviet round -- a target round, "popular" would be a measure of how many there are compared to the pool of existing weapons (and not a measure of the total number, due to governmental restrictions or other factors).

Timmy,

You raised an interesting point that I overlooked though I was thinking about it at the back of my mind.MoA wrote that the 7.62X54R is inherently inaccurate.Then you posted about it being used in sniper rifles even in later days. I remembered that the Dragunov sniper rifle uses the same cartridge too albeit some modified bullets in the later years.

Thanks all for the info.

Best-
Vikram

Vikram: I can well imagine how one would consider 7.62x54r to be inaccurate. Depending on what one got hold of, there would be ample opportunity to find inaccurate specimens. Also, there was/is all sorts of ammo available for it. I've found that for my practice, Hungarian Heavy Ball (~ 170 g) seems to be pretty accurate compared to other stuff I've shot.

However, those M91/30 sniper rifles that were made famous by the movie Enemy at the Gates were accurate, and not because they were made to be. M91/30 sniper rifles were selected from production runs for accuracy, not specially made, and they continued to bedevil the enemy for years after, as was shown by the North Vietnamese use of them against the American Army in the Vietnam War.

Also, the Finns made pretty good use of the MN rifles and actions they got from the Tsarist stocks when they gained their freedom, along with others they scrounged out of European stocks after WW1. Many of their MN and MN-based rifles are of noted accuracy. Besides their barrel making, I suspect that a lot of this was due to the careful bedding the Finns used in their stock making efforts.

Upon further reflection on this subject, I'd also like to mention/admit/observe that, as someone (MoA?) earlier pointed out, sniper accuracy is not the same as benchrest target rifle accuracy. I'd rather not have my remarks be thought to infer that military cartridges and the rifles they are used in (whether sniper or not) can be thought of as being equal to to target equipment or specialized rounds like 6mm PPC and such.

However, in thinking of all that's been said here, how the 250-3000 Savage round would stack up against the 6.3x53r, concerning inherent accuracy. The 250-3000 Savage, designed by Charles Newton, was always regarded as an inherently accurate cartridge, as were the .22-250 and 300 Savage, which were derived from it.

Another interesting musing I had was a reconsideration of the Vihtavuori loading data. N110 and N140 were the powders that were used, and the pressure quoted is pretty much the standard 50,000 psi.

Given that N110 is pretty close in burn rate to 2400, which is a very fast powder for for rifles (something I'd think was more suitable for light sub-velocity loads which would develop this pressure without achieving max velocity. For instance, 2900 fps is about 400-500 fps less than what one would expect with a 70-75 gr bullet in a 250-3000. On the other hand, N140 is fairly medium powder (a fairly slow powder in a 250-3000) and almost 3000 fps for a 93 gr bullet seems a tad slow, when compared to the same speed for a 100 gr bullet in the 6.3x53r. The case capacity of the 6.3x53r is larger than the 250-3000; I'd be thinking it would be closer to that of .257 Roberts. So I'm wondering if the Vihtavuori data really represents all of the potential of the 6.3x53r, given that there's a wide range of powders between N110 and N140. But this is just musing on my part.

Another way to look at this in terms of case capacity would be to compare related cases: the 300 Savage (derived from 250-300, and with a slight bit more of case capacity) and the 7.62x54r (which is the 63x53r's parent). In this case, comparing, say the 150 gr bullet, the 7.62x54r exceeds the 300 Savage by 200 fps, using more than 12 gr of 4320 to do it.

I still like the idea. Maybe in a few years, I can sign up for a few classes at Trinidad and make up something to try it out!

BTW, here's a little note of interest:

Mosin Nagant Vostok 6.5x54R Olympic Winter Games Biathlon rifle

I think being choosey is something most of us cant afford here in India.. Anything that can go 'bang' is still better than nothing! That's why most of us have to be content with owning a 'state of the art' product of IOF like the .315 or the ashani .32. Boo hoo hoo..

Jonah

Timmy assuming you're reffering to AA2400.
From data I have N110 is actually a lot closer to 4100 or H4198 than 2400.

From a pressure viewpoint, I would be hesitant to switch casually between N110 and N140. The latter is close to Varget in performance.
Between N110 and N140 you have 120, which works very well in the 7.62x39, The 130 which isnt very popular, 133 which is defacto for 6 PPC, and .223 and we have 135 which is decent with light loads for the 6 NBR. I havent really seen loading data for N110 with the 7.62x53R in the VV manual. 7.62x39 yes, but not for 53R.

The 762x54 has been used very effectively in wartime, notably by a number of Snipers, however even though the likes of the Dragunov and clones do use it, 2 MOA isnt really accurate. Fun yes, accurate no.

The 6.3x53R is really an anomaly, a cartridge for a specific purpose, but based on an unsuitable case and rifle action. Loaded to full potential, it's easily the equivalent of the .257 Roberts. However, the 1-14" twist restricts it use to lighter bullets. It was not legal for big game, but was strictly a "big bird" loading, with a light bullet loaded to medium velocity. To hunt a turkey-sized bird at up to two-hundred yards, without destroying it. The 7x33 Sako round served the same purpose, in a more appropriate form.
As an aside, 7x33 Sako rifles and ammo were imported into India in the 1950s.

MoA: You're right, there's no substitute for a purpose built target rifle or cartridge. A military weapon may produce some interesting results, perhaps outstanding if tweaked, but it cannot equal the results of a purpose designed and built target rifle.

Using the 7.62x54 in an MN is an interesting exercise, yes, but not quite as interesting as SMLE shooters! Those require even more tweaks, and yet they can produce exciting results as well, though again, not like a real target rifle.

Regarding cartridges and powders, the link I provided above (http://membres.multimania.fr/shooter/vitha/63x53r.html) is from Vihtavuori loading data, like the 2002 manual I have. All of the various burn charts I have:

http://www.reloadbench.com/burn.html
http://home.hiwaay.net/~stargate/powder/powder.htm
http://www.varmintal.com/pburn.htm
http://www.reloadersnest.com/burnrates.asp

as being right next to 2400 in burn speed. Is there a different chart you're using? Given that the 7.62x54r case (and thus, the 6.3x53r) is larger than the 250-3000 case, I'd be thinking that one would be starting with slower powders, not something in the 2400 range. Even powders in the 3031 range seem a bit slow, though of course, I haven't tried them!

i would go for 7.62 NATO as i cut my teeth on it.
short range 3006 does what is need.
105 for longer range. drawback damm hard to carry on your back.

at the end of the day would use anything.

Timmy,

Learn something new every day. I have no experience with the Alliant powders, and limited experience with Hogdgon (4198, 4895, 4350 and Varget), I primarily use Vithavouri powders.
I guess I need to get some 110 and try it for the 7.62x39 at the very least.

I like the Mosin as a curio, though prefer the K-98 and clones from the period. Would love to own a Garand again, but would much rather have the STG 42.
In terms of military calibers, difficult to beat the 7.5 swiss, and am looking forward to getting my STGW 57. (June-July).

I tend to think of cases and match them with powders -- like 7.62x39 and .30-30 seem to match up with 3031. But I haven't had the chance to do much rifle reloading for some time. I did get some 7.62x54r dies and also the Lee dies for .308 that have the neck sizer. I'm anxious to get going on that RFI 2A. But most everything I've been doing has been for handgun, especially .38 Spl with some .45 LC thrown in. I don't even have a decent place for doing .45 ACP, where I can pick up my brass.

RE: the MN, there are some real strikes against it: The slow lock because of the heavy striker, for example. Lots complain about triggers, but my M39, at least, has the Finn modification of having hardened pins bearing against the sear, which makes a world of difference. But the Mauser has a faster lock time and also the non-rotating extractor, which is a good thing. The steel case milsurp I shoot a lot of can get sticky, and it would be a lot easier to rotate the bolt without having the extractor rotating around the rim as the bolt cams it out of the chamber.

I do shoot a Polish wz38, which is a super-nicely made version of the M98, and it has all of the nice Mauser traits. The two that work against it for me are the short stock, which makes recoil a bit nasty (I have a big box full of Turkish 8mm in bandoliers, and that stuff is pretty hot). Also, the inverted V front sight in conjunction with the V notch rear sight isn't very friendly to my old eyes.

7.5 Swiss is the Cadillac, no doubt! And the STGW 57 is something anyone would love to own -- I envy you! As it is, the closest I'll come to that is the bayonet I have (STGW 57); it's made by Wenger and is a real nice looking piece of steel. No doubt, holding your STGW will give you that same kind of satisfaction, only a whole lot more of it.

One thing I've kicked about is working up some nice soft point 150gr hunting loads for my NHM-91. Kerry famously said that one didn't need an AK to hunt with, and I'd like the opportunity to show him wrong! Maybe when I get back to New Mexico, I'll have a chance to give some better attention to that. As it is, deer here in Texas are about the size of big dogs and taste pretty gamey, compared to our Western mule deer, so I haven't been too interested in doing much in the way of hunting here.