honcho
Junior Member
Posts: 33
|
Post by honcho on May 5, 2012 19:08:40 GMT -5
oldhoyt, how long did it take to get your dies? I ordered a set from the Hornady custom shop and they said 8-10 weeks.
|
|
|
Post by oldhoyt on May 7, 2012 6:06:05 GMT -5
Exactly. Mine took 10 weeks.
|
|
|
Post by oldhoyt on May 23, 2012 6:36:38 GMT -5
Took the Hoosier to the range last night. After bore sighting by looking down the bore and adjusting the scope to center everything at 50 yds, I shot the first bullet - dead center, 4" low. Made an adjustment and was near the center of the bull with the next shot. Another adjustment put me 2" high at 50.
Brushed the bore with copper-removing solvent/alcohol/dry patch and then loaded three into the magazine to fire for a group. These were in a cloverleaf, about a 1" group (holes nearly touching but not quite), 2" high.
Cleaned the bore again and went to 100 yds. Loaded 4 into the magazine and these were about 2.5" high and slightly right in a 2" group. Made a small adjustment down and left, and loaded 4 more. This time I shot for the bottom of the black (4" low of the bull) and this group was also 2", and 2" low of the bull. Then I fired the rest of the box in two groups with the same results, but what I was looking at is how the gun was cycling from the magazine. Everything worked fine, and it did not look like rounds were slamming against the front of the magazine.
The gun is relatively light, but recoil is only what I would call moderate, or less. About like a Marlin lever in 44 mag, or say 35 Remington. Basically a pop-gun.
The load was 46 gr of Accurate 2230, Hornady 180 gr SSP, and Winchester large rifle primers. I'm no marksman, but I'd shoot a deer at 150 yds with it today without a second thought. So, this gun/load is exactly what I was hoping for.
|
|
|
Post by HuntMeister on May 23, 2012 13:02:17 GMT -5
Thanks for the report oldhoyt! Sounds like you got a good venison maker!
|
|
|
Post by oldhoyt on May 23, 2012 15:12:29 GMT -5
I have no doubt it will do just that.
|
|
honcho
Junior Member
Posts: 33
|
Post by honcho on Jun 3, 2012 11:46:52 GMT -5
Got my dies this week and my barrel is in, haven't picked it up yet. I trimmed and sized a few 358 winchester brass and it was a piece of cake. Still haven't decided on what load or bullet I am going to use. Accurate and flat shooting is what is important to me not hyper velocity.
|
|
|
Post by oldhoyt on Jun 4, 2012 6:28:21 GMT -5
What do you use to make the initial cut on the case? I have a trimmer, but it would be a pain to use that to shorten a couple tenths of an inch.
A guy from another forum ran some numbers in a reloading software program. Here's what it said for a case length of 1.800, and a case volume of 51.2 gr water:
"I'm calculating this based on a case length of exactly 1.800", a case volume of 51.2gr H2O and and a cartridge OAL of 2.500". The barrel length I'm using is 22". QL is showing 46gr of AA2230 under a 180gr SSP as being a 106% compressed load that would generate 51K psi and 2,600fps. I don't mind mildly compressed loads, but this one is a bit more than I prefer, as it could cause the bullet to creep forward if there is not enough neck tension. QL suggests that 38.0gr of RL7 under a 180gr SSP would be a 97% charge, generate 54k psi and the same 2,600fps. QL suggests that 47gr of H335 under a 180gr SSP would be a 106% charge, generate 56k psi and 2,700fps. So, now that I have the exact numbers of your cartridge, I can see why the builder went with AA2230. From a performance standpoint, it's certainly a good choice. I would expect RL7 to be more readily available and I like the fact that you don't need a compressed charge to get the same, or slightly better numbers, from it."
I can't say what would be safe in your gun, or what it will shoot well, but AA 2230 appears to be a good powder. It achieves good velocity at somewhat lower pressures than some of the other powders. I have adjusted my load to 45 gr AA 2230, so it is somewhat less compressed than the 46 gr load.
|
|
honcho
Junior Member
Posts: 33
|
Post by honcho on Jun 4, 2012 19:32:06 GMT -5
I have a Lyman Universal Trimmer with the power adapter, which uses a drill on the end. It is pretty fast this way, I sure wouldn't want to hand crank that many cases trimming that much. My initial trim is 1.790 and then they are sizing to just over 1.8. I got my barrel today and bought 1 box of loads from AJ Brown. It is the 180grain Hornady but I don't remember which powder. I will probably go with this bullet and maybe Reloader 7 or 10X.
|
|
|
Post by oldhoyt on Jun 5, 2012 6:58:19 GMT -5
Good luck, let us know how it shoots. Also are you using the SSP bullet or another 180 gr?
|
|
honcho
Junior Member
Posts: 33
|
Post by honcho on Jun 5, 2012 11:20:42 GMT -5
Went with SSP, that is all he had on hand. Will try to get out Thursday or Friday to shoot that box of 20.
|
|
|
Post by oldhoyt on Jun 5, 2012 14:16:34 GMT -5
Sounds good. Please report what the primers on the spent cases look like.
|
|
honcho
Junior Member
Posts: 33
|
Post by honcho on Jun 8, 2012 12:17:09 GMT -5
Got out to shoot a little today. Took 4 shots to get 2.5" high at 100 yards. Next 3 went .650", I ain't that good!! The powder was Accurate 2230, primers and cases looked good. Will load up a couple of different loads and try them out in the next few weeks.
|
|
|
Post by BIGHORN on Jun 8, 2012 14:00:01 GMT -5
Waiting to hear the news that my gun is ready to pick-up. Took A.J. Brown a Marlin X7 to re-barrel to the .358 Hoosier.
Hopefully it turns out to be a winner.
|
|
|
Post by hornharvester on Jun 8, 2012 17:01:43 GMT -5
A word of caution about the 180 Hornady SSP bullets. These bullets were designed to shoot in the 35 Rem. When increasing speed they have a tendency to frag. I shot a yote two years ago with my 358 BFG @ 2800 fps and it blew the side out of the yote @ 20 yards. If you are shooting them past 2500 fps I would be very careful on close up shots and stay off the shoulder. Shots past 100 yards shouldnt be a problem.
After doing a lot of testing with the 358 BFG I would use a Speer 180FP instead of Hornady 180 SSP. h.h.
|
|
|
Post by oldhoyt on Jun 11, 2012 6:23:23 GMT -5
I have backed down to a 45 gr charge of 2230 for that reason. Shot the new loads Friday after work, still 1" at 50 and 2" at 100. While this is not great accuracy by any means, I weas shooting off a sandbag only (no rear support) and the trigger on this gun is very heavy. It's safe to say the gun shoots as well as I do, so I'm satisfied to take it hunting.
When I run out of these bullets, I'll probably change to the Speer 180 or a 200 gr bullet. We'll see what the 180s do on deer and go from there.
|
|
|
Post by steve46511 on Aug 14, 2012 1:56:25 GMT -5
All of the wildcats created for IN deer have a "gawd's plenty" velocity and energy for whitetail (and a lot larger of the same class animals too, IMO!) To first answer your question, oldhoyt....Id give Ramshot TAC a shot if top end velocities are the main goal. There are several threads about guys following John Barsness's 2008 article on TAC in a 358 Win with positive results. NOTE, JB went over the edge on loads and went by HIS rifle/chamber/etc max that is WAY over max but none the less it worked and others have figured out the 358 in a solid bolt action can take a bit more pressure than over all reports in most handloading books that have no clue what youre shooting them IN. I went a similar direction but with a different round, different end goal perhaps too simply because my wildcat thoughts were as much about the RIFLE I wanted and not just the round/velocity. I am not building just an effective legal round, Im building a total package of what I want that will do what I want..........and what I like. This has been a fun journey and am truly glad Ive got the rifle and dies at the gunsmith, brass and bullets sitting here with only the waiting (the worst part) to go before I can see what load I will choose to shoot our Wiley Whitetail with. This is not a debate, nor meant to be.....there are other wildcats being built faster but king of the hill was not ever my intention so I am having put together a slightly larger version, done the same way as the creation of the 358 Hoosier. That said, some other will be indeed "faster" but I REALLY doubt if THIS old fart could tell anyway. LOL There are indeed some wildcats out there really zipping along but I agree that your adapted 358 will do 99.9 percent of what hunters here would ever ethically contemplate...and then some even on LARGER game out west. Im sure I would have went with one for exactly the same reason, if the rifle of my choice would have been made at any time in the 358 Win. The standard 308 bolt face guns are very plentiful and a lot here in IN have them to convert but the only way for me to have a 358 in the rifle of MY choice, the Remington 700, was to go with a rebarreling job that I didnt want to mess with ...or pay for. That set the priorities in a factory barreled, .358 bore, Remington 700. There are only two and the cartridge I chose is a no brainer between the two, due to the larger case diameter and already in a short action (but long actions WILL work with minor adapation). The original short Magnum, the 350 Remington. No adaptation to neck length (even though more capacity would be created like some do), no adaptation at all except push the shoulder back .375 inches and trim to 1.790. Dies? Similar deal. Sent my trim and 3 die set to the same 'smith for shortening to length required, no "custom" dies need be ordered. The good ol Redding three die set to the rescue! or even less expensive for those so inclined. You decide the die cost, not the custom die maker. Brass? Oh sure, resized 350 RM brass is great, but cut off (ALL way too long), resize, and trim to length "anything belted mag" brass works great too. 1x fired belted mag brass is CHEAP. Even new is sometimes. Buddy bought 300 7mm mag new brass....75 bucks.....shipped. Case capacity? A bit less than the WSM rebated rim crowd wildcats, Im SURE, but not a huge amount and less work IMO. The 300 WSM holds 79 grains. The 350 RM.....73.7. VERY similar in length 2.1 and 2.17 Over 93 percent by comparing parent cartridge capacities. Quite "enough" IMHO....heavens! www.chuckhawks.com/rifle_case_capacity.htmFormed to specs ....the difference will be smaller in grain count AND this version will have the standard 350 neck, quite short enough of course in OAL to "gain" a bit by seating bullets out .......if one so wishes. One COULD set the shoulder up a bit but the gain, again TO ME, isnt worth it. Easy, safe, practical .....factory round neck length. So, IMO, Ive traded a bit of velocity ( with more remaining than ILL ever need) for a sensible and lethal wildcat, created from MY OWN aborted thought processes (LOL), in the rifle of MY choice, with the least amount of gunsmith work needed.N othing is "geared towards top velocities" in my "build". The over all total package mentioned was always considered along with "cheap and easy" LOL! Many "home gunsmiths" could to it all in the basement. Standard 22 inch barrel set back less than a half inch. Same ol, Same ol factory barrel, same old same old lovely 700 Rem Ive hunted varmints with many decades. The round is available in findable Model 700s, Model Seven and the 673 Remington "Guide Rifle" (that my buddy is having converted as well). "More than adequate"(my smith assures me) in case capacity/velocity/energy for my uses here and even in MT at my sister's at sensible ranges with appropriate bullets......it is a dream come true for this ol Hoosier Hunter! HUNTING INDIANA WHITETAIL WITH A 700 REMINGTON. ETA is sometime within the next few weeks so Ill post whatever results I find.....but truth be known? What it is.....is what it is. For the LIFE of me I cannot imagine wanting "more" but more power to those bent on maxing out everything in that quest. God Bless Steve PS...........DANG..almost forgot!! .....I even named it! In "hunter orange"( or supposed to be...looks "yella") LOL> "Built for the deer class family"......The 350 JMRIf anyone ever is interested in it but us locals. That's fine. While the 350 JMR can stand for proper cartridge nomenclature like the "350 Junior Magnum Round"....Ill have a bit more on that later. There is another reason for us here to have the JMR included. (this is a change from a previous "350 CXP2" since the "CXP" is a tradmark but when you know "the real" reason for the JMR....you'll understand why I think this is a great thing. Rifle "1" of 3 for any other Rem nuts!
|
|
|
Post by dbd870 on Aug 14, 2012 4:34:53 GMT -5
It's not fancy, but somehow I really like the looks of that rifle.
|
|
|
Post by oldhoyt on Aug 14, 2012 7:02:37 GMT -5
Sounds like a great project. Do you know the volume (grain weight of water) of the case?
|
|
|
Post by steve46511 on Aug 14, 2012 9:51:01 GMT -5
Sounds like a great project. Do you know the volume (grain weight of water) of the case? Not able to actually measure it yet but wont be long now and Ill have the form and trim die to work on brass so Ill have unfired stuff to check out but the smith is one who has worked with the 35 cal wildcats some 20 plus years and he and I have a "good guess". Worst case (pun intended), Ive recreated the 358 Win.....in ballistics but were expecting more than that. For those that absolutely feel the largest case capacity possible is needed for whatever reason.........other options are around for a bit more but with that capacity its easily a bear/moose gun. For me, more would be wasted and really doubt Ill load it to max 90 percent of the time. Ill stick my neck out and call it 59-62 grains. Not the biggest and baddest but certainly "enough". Even if less than that...I really wouldnt have a complaint. Nope, not fancy........"fancy" versions I'd call the 673 Rem. Laminated stock, vent rib, "batman" looking front sight like my buddy bought. I DID find a little fancier STOCK version and well, being the woodXxxxxxxxx I am about gun stocks.....I couldnt help myself. LOL I bought another, same version.....very dark, lots of grain. I can have TWO right? (Im single......LOL) Addicting stuff this "rolling your own"......... If you have never compared the 358 to 350........here they are side by side (well......notREALLY.....notice the 358 sits slightly in front of the 350.....etc. A bit of an optical illusion there. The 350 is quite a bit larger in diameter). Also shown is the 35 Whelen. It will give you a general idea of the possibilities when set back a bit. The WSM cases are just that much more again in diameter so the 350 RM lies just about mid way between the 358 Win and 300WSM case in diameter. Again, "the biggest and baddest" was not and still isnt the goal. The 358 Win alone will do it all on whitetail to longer ranges than most hunt. Comparitive case capacities in parent rounds with a few thrown in for general consideration. (all rounded figures) .35 Rem 51 .356 Win 57 .358 Win 57 .35 WCF 69 .35 Whelen 71 .350 Rem Mag 73 7 WSM 81 7 Rem Mag 84 God Bless
|
|
|
Post by cedarthicket on Aug 30, 2012 19:54:30 GMT -5
A guy from another forum ran some numbers in a reloading software program. Here's what it said for a case length of 1.800, and a case volume of 51.2 gr water: "I'm calculating this based on a case length of exactly 1.800", a case volume of 51.2gr H2O and and a cartridge OAL of 2.500". The barrel length I'm using is 22". QL is showing 46gr of AA2230 under a 180gr SSP as being a 106% compressed load that would generate 51K psi and 2,600fps. I don't mind mildly compressed loads, but this one is a bit more than I prefer, as it could cause the bullet to creep forward if there is not enough neck tension. QL suggests that 38.0gr of RL7 under a 180gr SSP would be a 97% charge, generate 54k psi and the same 2,600fps. QL suggests that 47gr of H335 under a 180gr SSP would be a 106% charge, generate 56k psi and 2,700fps. So, now that I have the exact numbers of your cartridge, I can see why the builder went with AA2230. From a performance standpoint, it's certainly a good choice. I would expect RL7 to be more readily available and I like the fact that you don't need a compressed charge to get the same, or slightly better numbers, from it." I can't say what would be safe in your gun, or what it will shoot well, but AA 2230 appears to be a good powder. It achieves good velocity at somewhat lower pressures than some of the other powders. I have adjusted my load to 45 gr AA 2230, so it is somewhat less compressed than the 46 gr load. Oldhoyt, I did some rough checking of the water capacity of the cases I have been using. The cases were made from original Winchester brand of .358 Winchester brass. I get about 50.7 grains of water when the case is filled up to the mouth and about 45.2 grains when it is filled up to the neck-shoulder junction. (These values may be off by a grain or so because of the fact that the edge of the water surface tends to “climb” up the walls of a cylinder (surface tension effect I believe)). I am not sure at what point on the case the reloading software program uses for its calculations, but I would assume it would be the neck-shoulder junction unless one were to actually seat a bullet and fill up the case with water to that specific point. Or, perhaps one could seat a bullet and then fill up the case from the bottom through the empty primer pocket’s flash hole, which I did not do either. My test rifle has a 22-inch long Shilen barrel with a 1 in 14 twist. With the powder lots I have been using I did not get a compressed load with the Hornady 180 grain SP/SSP bullet seated to a cartridge overall length (C.O.L.) of 2.50 inches when using 45 grains of AA2230. And, the velocity was around 2600 fps. With 40.5 grains of Reloader 7 the powder was also not compressed, and the velocity was around 2550 fps. With a very OLD (15 to 20 years?) lot of H335 I tried 45 grains and got only 2430 fps. A heavier load of the OLD H335, trickled and compressed, only gave about 2505 fps. So I abandoned working further with this powder behind the 180 grain bullet. Newer lots of H335 may give better results, but I have not planned to test them because I have a good supply of several other newer powders that I know give excellent results. Regarding software reloading programs, I realize that they can provide a ROUGH indicator of what velocity and pressure a given load will produce. But apparently (from comparing your posted data with mine) the computer program may sometimes give predictions that are quite a bit off the actual results. Therefore, it seems that there is no substitute for working up loads carefully, especially so for wildcat cartridges for which there are no officially published data. Perhaps one of the best uses for these programs is to narrow down the list of powders that may be used to produce the maximum velocities with a given bullet and C.O.L when a powder charge is at 95 to 100 percent loading density AND the resulting calculated pressure is at or below the maximum recommended for appropriate factory cartridge loads. And, here I am assuming the program uses the actual usable powder capacity of the case, not the capacity up to its mouth. I have not actually used those programs, so please pardon my lack of first-hand knowledge, and do not take my comments about them as gospel.
|
|