Anyone have any reloading experience with one of the #4Mk1s that were rebarrelled to 7.62 NATO. I was wondering what case life is like with that conversion.
Printable View
Anyone have any reloading experience with one of the #4Mk1s that were rebarrelled to 7.62 NATO. I was wondering what case life is like with that conversion.
Moderators
Ireload2 is reopening a subject that was already locked down here, he is doing the exact same thing he was doing at Gunboards and is just looking for an argument and to create trouble.
Inherent Weakness ? - Military Surplus Collectors Forums
Are the moderators at this website going to allow the same repeat performance by ireload2 and Alfred that happened at Gunboards to happen here also?
The last four threads I started at Gunboards were locked down because of ireload2 and Alfred arguing and it is starting all over again here.
https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/deleted.gif
https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/deleted.gif
Under different circumstances, I´d have taken this question seriously.
Its a simple enough question.Quote:
Originally Posted by villiers
The 7.62 NATO cases are much thicker walled than most .308 cases, so as long as loads are worked up at reasonable pressure levels the cases should last a long time.
Low end 150 grain bulleted loadings of the .308 generate only a few percent more chamber pressure than high end .303 loadings, and there are many .308 handloads that generate pressures equal to the .303 MkVII or even less.
The Winchester semi balloon head match cases were introduced to allow use of the heaviest bullets while maintaining enough powder space to avoid excessive pressures. The same loads considered safe in the larger capacity case loaded in a thick walled 7.62 NATO case could be dangerous in any rifle.
I haven't seen any mention of the headspace specs for the L42 in the articles on this rifle found on this site. As a long range sniper rifle I'd expect it would have tighter headspace than a battle rifle. If so that should allow long case life with loads that don't overly stress the action.
This could be a legitimate question or an attempt to do an end run around a locked thread. (Yes I know what it actually is but I’m offering a second chance here) I will allow this to go forward for now BUT if this thread takes the same course as the last I will be locking it and issuing Infraction Points.
Have a read here BEFORE you post below me:
What is the Infractions system? - Military Surplus Collectors Forums
This is the only warning this time.
L42's have cases with 3 reloads so far (150 gr 2800 fps matching British ball vel.) Lots of cases so not many cycles.
The .303 British is rated at 45,000 CUP or 49,000 PSI
The 7.62 NATO is rated at 50,000 CUP or 60,000 PSI ( The 118 sniper round is rated at 52,000 CUP which makes the 308 and 7.62 equal in pressure)
The .308 Win is rated at 52,000 CUP or 62,000 PSI
Alfred is incorrect about .303 pressures being close to each other, there is 5,000 to 7,000 CUP difference and 11,000 to 13,000 PSI difference between the .303 and .308/7.62.
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../06/3082-1.jpg
The No.4 Enfield is made to withstand the pressures generated by the .308/7.62 in military configuration or civilian form as the Enforcer.
Please read “The truth about the 7.62x51mm NATO and .308 Winchester” in the link below, I was contacted by the author in 2008 thanking me for my efforts in helping fighting the myth about the .308 and 7.62 being different cartridges (read the sixth posting from the top by FALPhil)
I hope this puts the ignorance and lack of knowledge to rest about the .308/7.62 and urban myths, the .308 and 7.62 are one in the same here in the U.S. and by CIP in Europe.
Please click on the link below.
Please Critique This Article: 308 Win vs 7.62 NATO - TheFiringLine Forums
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...cicuppsi-1.jpg
Can you give us the estimated chamber pressure for these loads?Quote:
Originally Posted by jmoore
Found this on the Sierra site
They also list these bullets for the .308Quote:
Civilian offspring of
NATO’s 7.62 x 51mm
service cartridge, the
243 Winchester, the
wildcat 6.5mm-08, 7mm-
08, 308 Winchester and
the 358 Winchester.
So they list the .308 as one of the "offspring" of the 7.62X51, not as the same cartridge, and produce bullets for the .308 that are far heavier than those used for 7.62X51 Ball ammunition for use in infantry rifles.Quote:
#2165 .308" 200 gr. SBT
C.O.A.L. 2.800"
#2230 .308" 200 gr. HPBT
MatchKing
C.O.A.L. 2.800"
US Bolt action Sniper Rifles of today are militarized versions of Civilian .308 rifles, not converted WW2 rifles, so they would be proof tested to the same standards as the SAAMI requirements for the .308 rather than the less stringent requirements of the NATO cartridge.
As I said earlier
Thats "Low End" loadings, you can check the handloading data manuals and find many "low end" .308 loads that generate pressures far below the average pressures of either the top end .308 or 7.62 NATO pressures, just as you can find lower pressure loadings for practically any cartridge.Quote:
Low end 150 grain bulleted loadings of the .308 generate only a few percent more chamber pressure than high end .303 loadings, and there are many .308 handloads that generate pressures equal to the .303 MkVII or even less.
If the M118 Special Ball generates 62,000 PSI then it would not meet NATO maximum chamber pressure specs for Great Britian. M118 Special Ball would not be aproved for use in 7.62 rifles proof tested according to British regulations.
It may be aproved for use in their most modern Sniper Rifles, but nothing indicates that it is acceptable for use in the L42 or any Converted WW2 era action.
The same information is available from the British MOD, pressures there are expressed in "Bar" each Bar=14.5 PSI.Quote:
7.62 mm (7.62x51mm NATO) Designed to chamber NATO ammunition 415.0 / (60,190) 519.0 / (75,275) Pressure recorded in NATO design EPVAT Barrel with Kistler 6215 Transducer or by equipment to C.I.P. requirements
To me this looks to be going the same way as several of the other threads by Alfred & Ireload2 - starts with a simple (innocent ?) question and then starts to post all sorts of answers to a question that hasn't been posted.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alfred
1) I see this as going towards the same argument 7.62 Vs 308 - the original questions was case life in a No4 7.62
2) What has pressure differences between a 303 and a 7.62 got to do with it ? The original question was case life in a No4 7.62
We are not worried about low end pressure differences, the only pressures that matter are the normal operating pressures of the .303 British and the .308/7.62, and the No.4 has been proof pressure checked and accepted safe to shoot 7.62 NATO ammunition.
Also the M-14 is not a civilian bolt action rifle and it shoots the 118 special long range ammunition in its sniper configuration at 52,000 CUP or the same exact pressure as the .308 Winchester.
The pressure variations are caused by different testing methods BUT the actual pressures are the same, the maximum pressure difference between the .308 and 7.62 with any bullet weight is 2,000 psi.
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...08proof1-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...08proof2-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...08proof3-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...06/nato5-1.jpg