HBC in OZ about to make 303 projectiles????

[Bruce_in_Oz]

Duplicating the EXACT form of the Mk7 would require, as you say, a "ball / lightweight filler" in the nose.

Ideally, these proposed bullets would be an EXACT duplicate of the old bullet. An open-based bullet will "bump-up" a bit on ignition. Whether that will happen with a thin-jacketed HP is something for serious experimentation.

However, the forming dies for "ball" projectiles are a bit different from those commonly used to form HP / SP bullets. I understand that there is a difference in the basic jacket as well.

That's why I suggested going with a product that has the same static and dynamic attributes, even if the jacket is on "backwards".

If the "hollow" point has approx. the same diameter as the meplat of a Mk7 bullet, the external profile is the same as a Mk7 (for magazine retention, feed and exterior ballistic reasons), the overall mass and static balance are the same as a Mk7, and the base is slightly concave, it SHOULD appear to the rifle to be a Mk7. Inserting a soft plastic ball that deforms to the shape of the space may well be a good idea; I was just thinking about saving a few cents per bullet.

I think that the biggest problem will be selecting a propellant,(and the correct amount thereof). What is needed is one that is relatively fast for this bullet weight and will duplicate the "launch characteristics" of Cordite, to provide both the required muzzle velocity AND a similar burn / PRESSURE / acceleration curves, so that the vibrations for which the rifles were built to compensate, are present. The AR2208 commonly recommended is significantly slower burning than Cordite.

If these "Mk7.5s" are even CLOSE to all of the above structural and mechanical criteria, it will be an enormous improvement on the current situation.

I would suggest that our trusty bullet maker has LOTS of variables in the air already.

However, ultimately it falls to the "punters". If enough of us do our bit and "test" a decent sample propelled by all manner of evil brews, in all manner of old iron, we can all be part of a very cool experiment that could lead, as it did with the 155s, to an even better product. And, no, I do not work for Optimus.

[Bindi2]

The Highland 174gnFMJBT open base were or are the closet I have seen to the MK7. They were quite a bit shorter and the centre of their mass was a lot closer to the front unlike the MK7. The centre of MK7 mass in my opinion was the main reason for the long lasting long range records.
I would be more than happy to screw a 303 barrel into a Barnard, Ackley improve the case and use new made MK7s for F/C. The sniper shoots would also get a regular competitor ( stock standard ).
3031 is close to cordite but I wont use it anymore to hot compared to 2208 which is more accurate anyway. Will admit to having not used 2206 nor likely to do so.
The potential of a good Mk7 copy is huge.

[CINDERS]

Whilst in a manufacturing sense to accommodate the aficionados I don't think having the plastic ball in it will worry any of the rest us.
The more important thing is to go to .312 like TAIPAN ~ Seirras - .311 the TAIPANS were very accurate in all my 303's I say .312 as we want to get the most we can out of the barrels though throat wear is another consideration in the ol' timers which may cause consternation no matter what you try.
Have to remember though we do not use cordite any more so that may alter the way the rifles shoot.
I just brought 1000 174gn SMK's and that set me back $600.oo/AU so it is getting up in price a while ago someone suggested Woodleighs boy that is getting expensive.
I reckon bring them on and I will join the queue for 1000 as I am dusting off my 4's to rejoin the fray of hitting the black bit somewhere and smelling burnt gunpowder.
We as shooters in the West will have to suffer the freight costs as usual as sadly we here are the poor cousins to the rest of this country.
I say this as a born and bred Sandgroper its just the way it is............
I realize businesses have to make a profit but I feel at times we here in the West are seemingly always on the brink of a drought whether it be powder/projies/cases or primers.

[Bindi2]

HBCs don't cost anymore to freight to Perth from Darwin than to the East Coast might even be cheaper. Chin up Cinders.
I know Taipans are good still have a few but they are not as good as the Mk7 was. Why settle for second best when the best could be made.

[Roger Payne]

Well at least yours will be cheaper than mine Cinders! Firstly, I'm hoping that this does come off successfully, & secondly that someone will then consider England worth shipping to. As Patrick mentioned earlier, there are many shooters in Europe generally who will be praying for this to happen & that they can then get hold of some.

[desky85]

Hi Roger,
This is the link to Optimus Projectiles website testimonials and worldwide shipping info.

Shooter Testimonials

Worldwide Shipping

There are a few of your fellow Englishmen posting in the testimonials, so they must have shipped some over in the past.

I am with Cinders with regards to the design. As long as it is a good quality projectile at a decent price, I will be happy. I also love to support a locally made product! It does sound like from SSJ's reply from them that Optimus is going to try to produce something similar to the MKVII projectile, which will be awesome!

Word on the street was they had a bit of a hiccup with production of the HBC projectiles few years back, which can happen with any manufacturer. This is what brnom2 was probably refering to. One of my local dealers here in Central Queensland is one of Optimus' Distributors. He is also a top F Class shooter. He has said all is rectified and the projectiles are being used by a lot of the top longrange shooters including himself. I have used close to 1000 HBC projectiles now and I think they are great!

[Bruce_in_Oz]

The whole "density" thing was obviously on the minds of the engineers who had been given a "shake-up" by the appearance of the "spitzer" bullet in the 7.92 x 57 Mausers. It obviously stirred the Americans who had not long finalised their "re-imagining" of the Gewehr 98 and cartridge: Delete .30-03 and insert .30-06.

The first (that I know of) British attempt at the same caper was in late 1909.

By then they were well aware that velocity was the key, and thus they produced a bullet in which the lead core occupied a bit over half the length of the jacket, with the forward portion of the core being aluminium; sound familiar?

However, whilst the length of this bullet, (1.269") was close to the old Mk6 and future Mk7 (1.26"-1.30") it only weighed 160 gn. The overall loaded cartridge length remained the same, otherwise it would not run reliably in the various machine-guns of the time; Lewis, Hotchkiss and, of course, the Vickers.

Probably perfectly good as a rifle bullet, even though it, and the subsequent Mk7, required a re-design of the magazine for reliable feeding.

I suspect that it was quietly dropped when the long-range field tests from the machine-gunners came back.

Ultimately the Mk7 was (and still is) a very fine compromise between two requirements:

1. Squeezing velocity (remember that the .303 case has somewhat less powder capacity than the 7.92 x 57 or, especially, the .30-06, both of which were fueled by granular NC propellants as opposed to "tried and true" Cordite, and

2. "Down-range" performance.

At "short" ranges, impact with soft tissue will produce wounding that is "enhanced" by hydrostatic shock; pretty nasty stuff.

At longer ranges, even though linear velocity is shed, the bullet retains most of its rotational velocity. Thus on impact with some unfortunate individual, it may well drill a neat hole through "soft tissue", but if it strikes bone, webbing, cigarette tins etc on the way in, it will become unpleasantly unstable, primarily because of its "base-heavy" design, and "wander off" in random directions, tumbling as it goes.

When I can remember how to post a large-ish picture, I will put up the drawing for the 1909 "Mk6.5" bullet.

[Bindi2]

B i O I have played with Mk7s at higher velocities as well as many others. That is why I would build a range rifle for F/C in 303 AI the accuracy is very good probably better than the 7mm. The other purpose of the Mk7 is not in question or context today.

[Bruce_in_Oz]

Bindi2:

I take your point.

A lot of my ancestors / relatives did one of the several 20th Century "adventure tours" clutching a Lee Enfield. Most of them came back in one piece, if at times, somewhat "shaken". That is why I am acutely conscious of what the original designers were working at.

It was not many years before the appearance of the Mk7 that the Mk2 (Hollow-Point) was being given a serious workout in places like South Africa. The Mk7 bullet was developed to achieve both "precision" and "terminal performance". You can very easily have one without the other. As an example, the .30 cal. 168gn SMKs can be astoundingly accurate (and precise) from a good rifle, but I definitely do not recommend them as a general hunting bullet. HOWEVER, they have appeared on several battlefields of late, in ISSUE ammo: they do not distort / "expand" etc. any more than Ball ammo, whilst offering a serious improvement in long-range performance from 7.62 NATO calibre rifles in "specialist" roles.

The Mk7 bullet is something of an early 20th Century triumph of small-scale engineering in a mass-produced product..

Before the advent of anti-biotics in the late 1930s, even if "lightly" wounded, you were more likely to be "carried off" by a nasty subsequent infection than directly from your wound. The figures from the American Civil War and the Crimean War are astounding. The possession of ample supplies of said drugs by the allies and NOT by the Axis is one of the under-reported features of WW2.

[Bruce_in_Oz]

And about the predecessor to the Mk7............

(As Bullwinkle would say:"This time for sure!")

Attachment 61184