- This topic is empty.
-
Topic
-
sgt.mike
Been forever and a day since I have posted anything on here So here goes.
The cartridge is the 300 Black (in a AR Pistol format) I’m leaning toward Subsonic use only (suppressed)I was looking through Al’s inventory this one struck me as a possible candidate what is everyone experience with this mold or another suggestion….
Thank to everyone in advance
sgt.mike
-
Replies
-
Mike B.
Here is a bit of intel that I worked up last evening, that may or may not be of interest to you.
With a bullet that heavy you will be taking up a good bit of the cartridge interior… so I also made up a scaled dwg on top of the SAAMI cartridge dimensional intel… to give you an idea of what you will be looking at as a finished round.
The cartridge case empty sans the bullet will apparently hold 25.1 GR of H2O,(1.63 cm cubed) volume.
The bullet seated to the depth of .625 (as called out on the NOE drawing) leaves about 1/2 of the original case capacity (0.853 cm cubed) for the powder charge.
The resultant cartridge is predicted to have an overall COAL of 1.866 inches.
This is within the SAAMI Min – Max of 1.780 min to 2.260 Max.
That means that the cartridge will most probably load into your mags without any issues in that area of concern.
Finally at the bottom of the attachment is the remaining cartridge intel showing the bullet displacement and the predicted COAL as noted above.
I did use a barrel length that was most probably longer than your pistol length assembly will be when I initially ran some basic data in regard to your comment that the round as you noted will still be subsonic.
In case you do not have the speed of sound intel at your finger tips… I have attached that intel gleaned from the internet.
At 20 °C (68 °F), the speed of sound in air is about 343 meters per second (1,235 km/h; 1,125 ft/s; 767 mph.
The issue as I see it is that you are going to have to load the cartridges with a load that is strong enough to cycle the action, unless you want to shoot your pistol version as a single shot.
You did not mention the twist on the barrel, so I might recommend that you initially take the suppressor off the pistol at first… to make sure that the rounds going down range do not exit the barrel and begin to go sideways a short ways down range on the way to the target.
You also did not mention the twist that your pistol barrel twist is cut to.
From what I have read that seems to be an issue if the barrel twist utilized is too slow to stabilize that heavy a bullet in question
Surfing the NOE website I found what I believe is a related topic that might be of interest to you in your endeavor for pistol load data in a 300 Blackout pistol. The bullet weight is similar. Just to be safe I would start with the lowest powder charge shown as that referenced bullet is a bit heavier and I believe must also be seated a bit deeper in the cartridge case The topic dates from 7-1-2019 and talks about the loads for the 311-247 in a pistol configuration.
I have attached the text of that email string to this reply.Mike B.
the twist is 1-7″ … pistol length Gas block adjustable Seekins. The barrel length is 7.5″
Thank you for all the looking and research that was some great information that will come in handy for this endeavor.
I did a couple of Loads using the Serria 165gr Gameking (bullet length 1.195″) with 10.5 Grs of AA1680 COAL 2.110″ with really good accuracy and then loaded some 110gr Nosler Varmaggon with H110 @ 18.5gr with outstanding accuracy (consistent bugholes).But my objective is to find a low cost bullet ( Cast, flat based, gas checks have come off and ruined suppressors, so flat based is the answer ) to plink with Suppressed that allows good accuracy (less than 2MOA) and is more for giggle factor than anything it really only has to make a hole in paper with a low sound signature and reasonably good accuracy. Proper cycling would be great but not really required.
I chose AA1680 as that powder usually produces a higher volume of gas the lower load grs versus some of the others on the market. Another point to remember is that a load that will not cycle with the can off usually will cycle with the can on, as the can retains a good amount of volume and creates back pressure when normally the gas volume has been released to the atmosphere when the can is off.
Western powder list data for a 240gr Sierria ( bullet length 1.591, which is not a true indicator ogive is what will determine the case volume and determine COAL in the work up) load data that reliably functions in a AR platform which is really close to what I was using for the 165grs SGK, VMD for AA1680 is 0.070 , so a 10.5 grs load (10.5X.070) would be .735cc’s. a 11.5gr load of AA1680 = .805 cc’s. so a 25.1 gr h2O (1.397cc’s) empty case volume say even a bullet that occupies half of the case capacity for it’s length would leave 0.69875 ccs which would allow for a compressed load.
Now what did I get with the 10.5 to 11.5 grs loading with the 165gr bullet was really good accuracy but the can did have unburnt power, as a direct result of too much unused volume in the case AA1680 prefers to be compressed for cleaner burning.
The can I was using for this was a Huntertown Krestel 9 which is a user serviceable can so it can be taken apart cleaned etc etc. Not the Best can on the market no where near as good as my Silencerco and Yankee hill cans, but it’s selling point was a reasonably priced can that I can disassemble and delead like a majority of the 22 LR cans on the market.But moving on to my objective or actually the question is what is everyone experience with the listed mold/bullet in the 1000 ish fps or less in the accuracy department using the 1-7″ twist? What will drive the train here is Ogive and seating to the lands… I have no issues with single loading the pistol, the COAL does not have to fit in the magazine. (and Mike B you hit what I was looking for with the post of the other bullet you referenced, might look there two)
sgt. Mike
Thanks for the reply & the additional basic load data intel that you are looking for.. Hopefully I got all the basic Intel from your reply inputted correctly into Quick Load.
Setting up the HCT-310-225-RN in Quick Load and mating it up with the AA1680 Powder produced the following prediction…
The AA1680 powder when loaded with that specific cast bullet is predicted to only burn about 77% of the powder charge. This concurs with what you reported in your reply of all the excess powder residue in the suppressor.
Loaded with a lighter cast plain base bullet AA1680 is predicted to burn above 99% of that powder with a longer barrel. However that is not the specific Intel that you are looking for.
Using the data that you provided Quick Load currently predicts that with the HCT-310-225-RN seated to a depth of .625. (I did not find what your particular & Preferred COAL was for your 7.5 inch pistol assembly), so I could not refine the specific load data any further to try to produce better match the prediction to your specific pistol application…
Seated to the depth of that particular HCT 225 Gr cast bullet design as noted above of .625. That Seating depth is currently predicted to produce a 100% fill of the AA1680, which would be around 12.5 grains of AA1680 powder. (Also approximately only 77 % of the said powder will be burnt in that pistol length barrel.
That ~ 100% powder charge is predicted to give a velocity of around 1200 FPS and a max pressure of around 40,000 psi in your 7.5 inch pistol length AR action.
That I believe would be a couple of hundred FPS faster than I believe that you are looking for… @ ~ 1000 FPS.
This means that in order to stay below the speed of sound that particular powder would only allow for an 80% charge of around 12 Gr of AA1680.
Since Quick Load can also do a variety of load predictions based on all the plethora of potentially similar powders in its data base as one of its options.
If you can let me know what the other powders that you might have on hand are… then I can potentially feed that powder and COAL intel into the equation and give you a better basis to proceed with in your endeavor… sans any actual feedback from others for your particular load combination of components…
AS per usual the normal legal admonition of please Double Check any Load Data provided with other manuals or powder mfg printed sources applies…
Sorry about that… but otherwise posting any specific load data which might work in your particular application… could potentially cause issues down the line… for someone not so much in the know…
Attached also is the link to that particular NOE HCT cast bullet in a plain base version…
https://noebulletmolds.com/site/shop/308-311/htc310-225-rn-ce4/htc310-225-rn-ce4-5-cavity-pb
If you want any more specific data you can most probably send me a PM (Possibly through Al) and I will be glad to scan the afore mentioned predicted data etc… and forward it to you. That’s barring any actual load combinations that might be posted on the forum for you.
Take Care & Stay Safe…
“… Loaded with a lighter cast plain base bullet AA1680 is predicted to burn above 99% of that powder with a longer barrel. However that is not the specific Intel that you are looking for. “
That sir does have my interest….
Powder’s on hand hmm
AA1680
H110
IMR 4895
IMR 4064
AA 4064
CFE Pistol
CFE 223
CFE Blackout
H335
Unique
AA5744 (which I misquoted the VMD on AA1680 the problem with glancing at a chart AA5744 it is .070 aa1680 is .066 which means it occupys less space in cc than AA5744 for the exact same grains used)
BullseyeI have several 30 cal molds on hand, but all are gas checked
Lyman 311143 (168gr length 1.060″without check) , NOE 30 XCB, NOE 311331 218gr RN (Length 1.210″ but with Ogive will need seat deeper in the case than the Mold I asking about) (yes I know they can be shot without the checks and will probably try some just for giggles ( until I find a mold on Al’s site here so darned many to chose from LMAO) I just feel that a PB will be the way to go all the way around.The unburnt powder is not a huge issue as the Suppressor can be taken apart and cleaned ( that being said if one can get cleaner burning why wouldn’t you ? ) right now the can is soaking in Hoppes #9 (before anyone loses their mind all parts are SS so no issue there)
While I am rambling here as I have not settled on a bullet mold to use specifically yet …
from your posting has me wondering If I shouldn’t go to H110 (VMD .0656, close to AA1680) as it is a faster powder, but then the gas volume vs pressure “might” rear it’s head which for anyone following this would be a concern . Me personally not so much just means I’ll have to cycle the action as this is just a range toy load that doesn’t mean so much.
I read the other post that you mentioned to the folks over there about this post … That bullet he is mentioning Might be a good one to try.Let’;s check the throat and where it is using three different cast bullets
1. Looking at the NOE 311331 218gr RN aka 311-222-RN-K3 — Coal should be around 1.990″ to the lands .. (case trimmed to 1.350″ leaves 0.640″ sticking out of the Neck
question will be if the coal is established just a tad longer will the bolt travel engrave the bullet and be in property battery without excessive bullet setback and a stuck bullet in the bore so in a misfire ya jerk the casing out dumping powder in the action …. I honestly don’t think it will work i think it will be too long
2. Lyman 311413 Coal 1.970″ to the lands case trimmed to 1.350″ leaves 0.620″ which to the crimp groove is 0.550″ so that is a GTG as the bullet can be seated forward closer to mag length to engage the lands in the throat)
3. Noe 165gr XCB Coal 1.862″ to the lands again Case trimmed to 1.350″ leaves .512″ of the bullet sticking out from the neck which a quick preview of the Drawing for that bullet will be real close to keeping the
What was the point of all this gibberish … the ogive versus the throat will determine the Coal and askew all the answers and I have not figured out the exact one I will like to try.
But looking back over AL’s inventory another one has caught my eye is the HTC 310-177-SP-BL2 vs the HTC 310-225-RN CE4 ( which I’m not sure but BL might be Al’s marking for Blackout)
think i’ll try the lyman 311413 168gr “Squibb” first ( had some powder coated and some just lubed with no Checks) .. but wondering if i should try H110 this time as well as a sample 10-11 grs of AA1680
THE BIGGEST FACTOR THAT QUICK LOAD APPEARS TO SHOW IS IN THE VARIATION OF THE MAX PRESSURE PRODUCED IS CHANGE IN THE SEATING DEPTH!! EVEN ON NON-COMPRESSED LOADS.
PLEASE NOTE… SAAMI MAX PSI = 55,000 PSI
IN ADDITION SEATING THE CAST BULLET OUT TO HARD TOUCH THE LANDS WILL ADD TO THE START PRESSURE GREATLY AS THE BULLET HAS TO BUILD UP PRESSURE TO BEGIN TO MOVE FORWARD AGAINST A HARD STOP LIKE THE RIFLING.QUICKLOAD CANNOT CALCULATE THIS…PLEASE PROCEED AT YOUR OWN RISK… !!!
IT IS WHY MOST SHOOTERS WILL BACK OFF AROUND .010 FROM A HARD STOP AGAINST THE RIFLING…
RE (Your Powder’s on hand) – Quick Load predictions using for now the original SD data & 225 GR cast bullet from the earlier reply today to allow one to compare apples to apples… So to speak…
AA1680 12 Gr 99% fill =~ (77% of the powder charge burnt)@ 100% fill ~ 1200 FPS & 40,000 PSI
H110 100% fill (Dangerous load ++ 60,000 PSI) = DANGEROUS LOAD PERIOD!
11.5 Gr (@~ 88% fill) =~ (96.84 % of the powder charge burnt) = ~1200 FPS & 41000 PSIIMR 4895 ~12 GR 99% fill =~ (ONLY 48% of the powder charge burnt) = ~ 15,600 PSI & 800 FPS (NOT A GOOD FIT.)
IMR 4064 ~11.3 GR 99% fill =~ (ONLY 49% of the powder charge burnt) = ~ 15,300 PSI & 790 FPS (ALSO NOT A GOOD FIT.)
AA 4064 ~11.7 GR 99% fill =~ (ONLY 41% of the powder charge burnt) = ~ 10,100 PSI & 660 FPS (ALSO NOT A GOOD FIT.)
CFE Pistol SORRY QUICKLOAD DOES NOT LIST THAT POWDER IN THE CURRENT VERSION THAT I HAVE…
CFE 223 ~13 GR 99% fill =~ (only 42% of the powder charge burnt) = ~ 16,300 PSI & 790 FPS (ALSO NOT A GOOD FIT).
CFE Blackout SORRY QUICKLOAD DOES NOT LIST THAT POWDER IN THE CURRENT VERSION THAT I HAVE…
H335 ~13 GR 99% fill =~ (66% of the powder charge burnt) =~ 24,800 PSI & 1000 FPS… (NOT A GOOD FIT BUT CLOSEST SO FAR).
Unique 100% fill (++ 78,000 PSI) = VERY DANGEROUS LOAD PERIOD!
5.5 GR ~70% fill = 100% of the powder charge burnt ~ 41,200 PSI & 980 FPS MAXIMUM DO NOT EXCEED!AA5744 99% fill (+ 51,800 PSI) = POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS LOAD!
78% fill (~78% fill) 9 Gr =~ 26,600 PSI & ~ 1000 FPS. (~ 82% of the powder charge burnt) PROBABLY THE BEST POTENTIAL COMBINATION OF THE POWDERS THAT YOU CURRENTLY HAVE ON HAND.I hope that this intel helps.
It will most probably be tomorrow when I can load the NOE HCT 177 GR cast bullet intel into my QuickLoad files, to possibly be able run some prediction Intel on possibly Unique or 5744 if that will work for you.Take Care & Stay Safe… Please double check this Intel on the different powder websites…
I don’t think that I made any mistakes in inputting the data, but it never hurts to double check…Sgt Mike
Trimming the case to accommodate the Lyman 311413 & the 311-222 should most probably be avoided if at all possible, as the cartridge case neck already is rather short… as it is.
I also see what you mean about the NOE 311-122 218 gr RN (Length 1.210″ with the short round Ogive will need seat deeper in the case than the Mold I asking about)
Have you thought about the NOE 310-208 SP mould for your application?
It has a 1.12 Nose Diameter Ogive.
Doing some rough numbers it appears that that particular cast bullet seated to .413 SD will give you an overall COAL of ~ 2.122. Which is within the SAAMI COAL Spec of 1.780 Min to 2.260 Max. The cartridge should also chamber and feeds from the Mag quite nicely, if my thoughts about your ARs chamber dimensions are correct.
The more pointed taper of the spitzer nose would potentially be a benefit to you also.
That would only leave the tapered as cast dimensions going from .305 to .302 & then down to .299 to potentially deal with.
SAAMI barrel specs I believe show that the bore diameter is .300. With the bullet seated to a depth of .413 the exposed nose would be .755.
Wait; Don’t say that you only have approximately .550 of exposed nose to meet the rifling.
The last .280 inches + prior to the cast bullet taper beginning on the cast bullet in question is predicted to cast @ .299 dia.
So .755 -.280 = .475 – This would potentially make at least that much clearance prior to coming in contact with the barrel rifling.
Attached is the link to that in stock NOE mould… of approximately 209 grains in a PB version.
https://noebulletmolds.com/site/shop/308-311/310-208-sp-bm4/310-208-sp-bm4-4-cavity-pb
Just for jollies I ran some data to see what QuickLoad might possibly predict as Potential Load data with 5744 Powder when the aforementioned PB cast bullet seated to .413.
10 grains of 5744 is predicted by QuickLoad to give you (~ a 66% fill will give you & ~ 1000 FPS with ~21.000 PSI) (~ a 78% powder charge burn)
Increasing the powder charge to 11 grains of 5744 is predicted by QuickLoad to give you (~ 72% fill rate & ~ 1100 FPS with ~ 26,100 PSI) (~ a 83% powder charge burn)
Finally 12 grains of 5744 is predicted to put you very near the supersonic velocity with ~ 1186 FPS (~79% fill rate with ~ 32,500 PSI) (~ a 87% powder charge burn) depending on your particular lot of powder which has a standard 10% +/- burn variation…
I hope that this Intel helps.
Take Care & Stay Safe.I was typing while you was LOL … pertaining to H110 and AA1680 which the data sources (Western and Hodgen says to use less powder than you had plugged in)
But I trim the cases to 1.350″ anyway ( in order to get all the cases to the same uniform length) which is still within the SAMMI specs of 1.368″-.020″ for the case (semi auto if this was a bolt gun I’d set the trim to 1.365″and not use the short cases but it being in a shell chucker yeah I retain everyone I can get a hold of maybe they will grow some? but it being almost a straight walled case maybe not so much LOL). I usually neck turn the converted .223 cases to a .009″ thick neck as well as the 300 black cases for uniformity and neck tension . On the .300 blk cases barely will the cutter make a cut when it does it’s usually only one small area or two for those on the .223 case cases converted yeah quite a bit comes off as usually the thickness is .014″+.
Now to your recommendation “Have you thought about the NOE 310-208 SP mould for your application?”
no I haven’t and will give it a look when I get done typing this loland reading your new post LOL
look here :
https://www.thereloadersnetwork.com/2019/01/04/300-blk-cast-bullet-for-dummies-noe-310-225-rn-start-to-finish/ just found thatNow if one pays attention to what he says about the type primers he used just clicked in my head small rifle magnum primers had to watch it twice to catch it now because he is using a sealed can he might not be able to catch if he has unburnt powder residue …
Thank you for the quick reply.
If you remember correctly I believe that I stated early on that the seating depth was the single most important factor in varying the load data in regard to pressure changes.
Second to this is barrel length. A longer barrel means that the powder has more time to burn before the bullet leaves the barrel. More time = more velocity…
On seating depth the data was calculated on a .635 seating depth as that was the original conversation based on the original NOE drawing for the HCT-310-225-RN PB as noted on that particular cast bullet sketch.
Also I seem to remember that you mentioned that your barrel length was 7.5 inches long sans the suppressor.
Third you originally mentioned that you preferred a close to a 100% fill rather than a lessor percentage fill. As you were apparently getting a whole lot of unburnt powder buildup in your stainless steel suppressor.
Fourth you mentioned that you wanted to stay subsonic… The QuickLoad data generated was based on my understanding of the data that you gave me, in your replies as your conveyed preferences.
Vary any one of those four parameters and the data presented becomes a not so accurate prediction any more.
By the way you mentioned the powder manufactures (Winchester & Hodgdon) had different load min & maximum load data based on different & unspecified load parameters.
What they most probably did not mention is the specific barrel length that the muzzle pressure & velocity data was generated from.
Most probably a longer barrel length… like 16 inch barrel vs your 7.5 inch pistol barrel.If you find a powder website that allows one to substitute a specific barrel length as a variable item of choice please put the link to that website on the forum. I tend to think that a whole lot of individuals would be interested… in that option.
The attached video link, (by the way) used I believe 11.0 grains of Accurate 1680 and a COAL of 2.100 with a similar 225 Grain cast bullet, all be it 1.335 vs 1.360.
A COAL of 2.100 basically translates into a seating depth of .401 and not .635 as we were originally discussing. That is I believe a .234 difference in seating depth. The difference in seating depth by itself changes the maximum pressure generated a great deal…
If you would like the QuickLoad data rerun using the longer COAL I will be happy to do that for you. Otherwise given erroneous premises on probably both our parts Equals the maxim — Garbage in = Garbage out.
The data in my reply is I believe valid for the parameters utilized in the calculations. A lot of people don’t care for QuickLoad. Unfortunately the data presented was not what you were looking for or were expecting.
That is why I mentioned several times to double check the data.
Maybe I should have also said to note the differences too.I have found QuickLoad to be a great aid in minimizing the number of load combinations that are less than desirable.
Sorry that I could not be of more help to you. I’m glad that you found that 15 minute video and another cast bullet of similar weight & dimensions.Take Care & Stay Safe…
Mike B You Sir was more help than you can imagined or give your self credit for.
Added:
I went to PM you about a different bullet combination and found out you had a block from PMing you
I am truly sorry if you feel you might have been slighted, or what ever (of course you could have blocked all PM’s from everyone because of other factors I’m not aware of).
Mike B.- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.