reloading the 8/81

[kendall]

A question on working pressures in the model 8/81's:

Nearly everything I read, including Ken Water's articles, a half dozen reloading manuals, and of course everyone's $.02 worth on the internet would have a fellow believing that the 8/81's shouldn't be loaded any hotter than the 35k SAAMI spec for the 35 Remington, but, they were offered in the 300 Savage caliber, which has a SAAMI working pressure of 46k CUP. IF the 8/81's were designed to handle the 300 Savage, shouldn't they easily be capable of digesting some stepped up 35 Remington loads without hurting them? Granted, offering them in 300 Savage was Remington's idea, and maybe JMB would have frowned on it. Who knows? and i'm not tryi8ng to make a 358 Winny out of it, but how about a 200 grainer at 2200 fps which is a standard loading for the 300 Savage?

thoughts?

[Roger]

It has more to do with the cartridge brass it self. Remember JM Browning designed that round to work specifically with The Rem. M-8 in 1900 or so. Smokeless powder was still very new. Also the barrel steel itself, may be different in those 2 calibers. I don't think it would be worth damaging your gun or yourself over such a small gain. My experience with 35 rem. Is substantial. And I can say with a lot of confidence, that it stops deer on the spot if hit in a somewhat vital area, keyword somewhat. It usually drops them in their tracks, or in a few yds. That being said, there have already been discussions on this forum about Hornady leverevolution ammo, which is supposed to be hotter. I have used it alot, with no problems. Who's to say. Just my humble opinions here.
Thanks for your time,
Roger

[kendall]

Thanks Roger. I posted on another thread my history with the model 8 as being a bit unusual in that out here in the wide open west, a model 8 in 35 was my grandfather's deer/elk gun during all of my formative years. I can only assume he was using Remington Core-Lokt ammo as he did not reload. The old Remington-Peters green and yellow boxes, both centerfire and shotshell were pretty ubiquitous around my house back in the 50's-60's. I also assume that their ammo was loaded hotter than it is today. My Speer #8 has it loading hotter than newer reloading manuals. There's a load in it with the old Herc RE11 that has a 180 grain pill going 2500 fps. Lots of folks say that the new manuals show milder loads because their labs have access to better pressure testing equipment than the older manual writers had. Others cite the "lawsuit" thing as the reason for milder loadings across the board in manuals today. I ascribe to the latter theory myself.
Also, I'm pretty sure that the metallurgy in a 1940 model 81 is superior to a model 8 mfg pre-WWI.
If I could never get a 200 grainer going faster than 2000fps in a 35, I'd be fine with that, but, I know the round and rifle are capable of 200 yard shots and it would be nice to flatten that arc a tiny bit, but more importantly add a wee more whump to it out at that range. Still, preserving the rifle is paramount, no question about that.

Kendall

[DWalt]

Until sometime in the 1970s (or possibly later), factory chamber pressure testing used the old "Copper Unit of Pressure" (CUP) system. CUP was really a crude analog method, and could not be converted to actual pressure units (PSI). Numerically, CUP was always somewhat lower than true peak chamber PSI, e.g., 40K CUP was likely to be closer to an actual peak chamber pressure of 50K PSI, if not more. Until the advent of electronic quartz piezo-electric pressure gauge measurement methods, there was no way possible to measure actual instantaneous peak chamber pressure (but both CUP and piezo methods of pressure measurement are still allowed under SAAMI standards). I do not know, but can imagine, that when true instantaneous peak chamber pressures became measurable by QPE gauges, there was probably considerable factory re-thinking of what propellants and loadings should be used to minimize peak chamber pressures while maintaining traditional historic muzzle velocities.

Personally, for a number of reasons, I see no good purpose to be served in firing hot handloads. It does not improve bullet terminal performance appreciably at ranges at which a M8/81 rifle should be used, it creates more stress, wear, and possible damage to gun parts, and it causes more pain and bruising on the shoulder. For me, shooting a handloaded .300 Savage in an M81 using a 150 grain bullet at a MV of about 2600 FPS is definitely not a pleasurable experience. And I am a substantially-sized person. I favor using loads that will reliably function the action, and not much more.

[81police]

great reloading advice Dwalt.

[imfuncity]

"Personally, for a number of reasons, I see no good purpose to be served in firing hot handloads. It does not improve bullet terminal performance appreciably at ranges at which a M8/81 rifle should be used, it creates more stress, wear, and possible damage to gun parts, and it causes more pain and bruising on the shoulder. For me, shooting a handloaded .300 Savage in an M81 using a 150 grain bullet at a MV of about 2600 FPS is definitely not a pleasurable experience. And I am a substantially-sized person. I favor using loads that will reliably function the action, and not much more."

Well said DWalt.