Bindii, if you are trying to calibrate for a 303, have fun, but this will help you with your 308 adjustments, it certainly works for me and most of the F class boys.
Bankstown Chatswood Rifle Club go to the ballistics page.
Glenn, I don't think we used anything other then MF rounds, the quality control and components were very good, even after 56 years a test of velocitys gave me these readings from MF56 ammo:
1. 2384 LO 2379
2. 2379 HI 2384
3. 2382 AV 2382
4. 2382 ES 5.62
5. 2383 SD 1.73 Now I have to say, if we could reload to that consistancy, we'd be laughing.
Just to back it up, different rifle, target barrel:
1. 2496 LO 2496
2. 2512 HI 2512
3. 2507 AV 2502
4. 2499 ES 16.59
5. 2496 SD O7.14
Will somebody get Ned out of bed, I'm missing him.
Thank You to muffett.2008 For This Useful Post:
09-03-2012 08:17 AM
Friends and Sponsors
Not a lot of variation in those velocities. Surely those low differences would only make a very minor difference on target.
Ned has been sent a wake up text. He is experiencing some pc issues, which might be keeping him offline for a bit.
That ammo and some earlier stuff is still bringing in possibles at most of the ranges with my old trusty.
Not so good on the new target dimensions though, but even my target rifle is battleing to keep me straight there.
If things get much worse you will see me on the dark side with a big scope.
Really Senior Member
Thanks Muff you are a legend.
2208 is very good in the 303 i find and if you believe certain data with much lower pressure than cordite or higher velocity for the same pressure. The problem is finding Mk7 projectiles.
I don't mean to be disrepctful but I've known Harry for more than a good few years and have spent many an hour listening intently as he's been good enough to recount some of his wartime experiences to me. I can tell you one thing for certain about Harry (Nigel G can back me up on this) and that's that time certainly hasn't "played any tricks on his mind" and having spoken to him at length only a couple of weeks back I can tell you he's still as sharp as a tack. I don't doubt, and am in no way questioning, your knowledge of the No4(T) on the Armourers bench and the KD range. That said if the most succesful British Sniper of WWII, a man who carried the 4(T) and used it in frontline combat day after day for twelve months, tells me he sought out MKVIII, AP and tracer for occasional special use then I'm afraid I'm going to believe him.
First Simon, you're not disrespectful at all and nor do I mind or object to any comment that you make. This is a forum that thrives on this stuff.
As I said, I have my steel helmet firmly in place and can take any incoming flak. I don't doubt anything that you're saying at all. In fact I know Harry myself and spent many hours with him and his German wife (with whom I spent a few hours practicing my schoolboy German), here, at this very house in the 80's, before he even became known in ex sniper circles. In fact I even had his deact No4T and scope rebuilt to an extremely high standard at our main Base Workshop. He never mentioned Mk8Z ammo to me.
What I am saying and maybe you might comment on the fact if you are bent on believing him, is that just how do you do shoot 8z from a rifle and telescope, matched together and calibrated to the trajectory of a bullet with totally different characteristics and expect to hit the target with the accuracy expected of '.....the most successful sniper in WW2' (or even a non sniper.....). If that WERE even remotely possible, I'd venture to suggest that they could have left the L1A1 telescope in .303"/Yards - and expect to hit a target! I'd also be asking myself this........ ready..... Pray tell me, what on earth will Mk8z do that Mk7 won't do from a rifle. What sort of longer range will a sniper expect when he's already got a matched rifle and calibrated 'scope that WILL hit the triple figure-11 at 1,000 yards (I know, because I've done it). And if you really do want a bullet that will stretch out longer, then......... well don't bother because the telescope won't go any further
Nope............. I stand by what I've said and do appreciate what you have said/repeated in good faith. But as I have said several times, sometimes, just sometimes............, like the Sten and Bren or even Mini Cooper 'facts' that we know are heresay or worse, some of this stuff unfolds in the telling I'm afraid to say. Sometimes, you have to be cruel, in a kind and diplomatic way and say these things to the purveyors of this stuff
The only unanswered question for anyone that believes this, er..........., 'possibly erronious stuff....' is just how would they do it? That's all I ask. Maybe there's a mathematical formula
As a little aside, I did something similar several years ago at our ITDU range over a few days and re-calibrated a S&B 6 x42 calibrated to 7.62mm NATO ball to 5.56 NATO ball. I can tell you this. Even with the RG trajectory charts, a slave rifle of each calibre, plenty of ammo and a day on the test range with an Enfield rest and spotting scopes so as to eliminate all human error, it wasn't simple and took the whole day and into the next and I only needed to go up to 800m. (the project failed for other reasons........)
I was going to keep out of this discussion - because I have the deepest respect for Peter's knowledge and I agree with everything he has said in this thread. I have known Harry Furness for 20 years and, like Simon, have met and corresponded with him on numerous occasions. I feel I have to support Simon because Harry has also told me and written to me about his liking of MkVIIIz ammo. Harry used the flattening the trajectory technique (as taught in the manuals of the time). The method is to zero your rifle at 300 yards and this guarantees a hit somewhere on the body at any range up to 400 yards. Once zeroed Harry wouldn't touch his elevation drum, let alone worry about clicks. Experience told him when to aim up or down a bit. He pulled off a snap shot at a German senior officer at 600 yards using this technique - he hit his target! After the war Harry remained in Germany waiting to be demobbed, along with hundreds of thousands of other Allied troops. In 1946 a skill at arms competition was held amongst all the Allied forces (this was mainly to keep the troops motivated). Harry entered the 3 day sniper competition.The competition was designed to simulate real battle conditions - sleep deprivation was part of the deal with the snipers being forced to build hides during the night and then to observe/shoot throughout the next day on an unknown distance shoot that lastest 12 hours. Harry used his proven technique and Parker Hale monopod rifle rest. Lots of money was riding on his performance as his battalion knew how good he was. Suffice to say Harry won and received a gold medal - I've seen the medal and if anyone can claim to be the best Allied sniper of WW2 - then Harry has the medal and scars to prove it. Both Peter and Simon are right in what they say - but Harry was exceptional.
Thank You to Nigel For This Useful Post:
Nigel, Peter, Simon, et al. Thank's very much, gentlemen, for a fascinating discussion/ debate. You can't put a price on material like this!
Thanks for that Ridolpho.
But back to reality. One PMer asks how a sniper using Mk8z ammunition with sight fixed/set to 300 yards, as described above say, would/could react to a nice big juicy target, like, say, a Brigadier getting out of his car at a crossroads or an impromptu OGroup meeting at the roadside 700 yards away. That'd be a fair question to ask, on the basis that any sniper would be able to engage a man at that range. Mind you, you'd be struggling with Mk8z in your magazine and sights zeroed for 8z and set for a body hit at 300/400. You'd be even worse off if you were using the No32 sight set at (anyone worked it out yet).
I have to say that on balance, I'm not quite convinced yet. But with enough persuasion, I could be............
Next, someone should ask about barrell leed life with 8z and the No2 leed gauge
Really Senior Member