New manufacture Mk.7 projectiles

[Snowy Owl]

That was a bit barbed Snowy. What did I do to deserve that? As one who's done it several times (and been luimbered I hasten to add.....), I'm just stating the obvious with no pointing or reflection on anyone

Mr Laidler,

Barbed words ? No, not at all. Please note that I wrote three points of suspension at the end of my post - an open door to humor.

The problem is that you made a generalization when you wrote that "people are notorious for being non-showers AFTER the event". Some people or many people or most people or the vast majority of people, maybe, but "people", meaning all the people ? No. So, when I said that I would buy two thousands bullets, do I have to consider myself as being part of those "non-showers" because you wrote it ? Again, no.

I would be the last person in the world to tell you what to do or say but you cannot expect me to stay put when you make generalizations - generalizations are risky business. They might draw comments.

Anyway, I am not at war with you. I just want to tell you that some people do show up when the time has come - and I will show up if ever those bullets are produced.

Snowy Owl ...

[drweiler]

Thanks for your time and energy Brian. Guess it boils down to how much a round before many will make a commitment. 25 cents a round is attractive to me if that is to be. Set up at the SAR's Show today, you're missed. Cheers, Don

[Snowy Owl]

The B.C. for the MkVII bullet is given in the 1929 Textbook as 0.255 for short (up to 1000yds) ranges.

Seems to me to be quite a bit low at 0.255 and I hope that the Textbook is wrong - that is, I furiously hope that it is wrong. No offense to you, Sir.

[jmoore]

I'm in for at least a thousand.

Wouldn't mind either a hunting bullet or match type, but would lean toward a game bullet based on the accuracy seen with their 180 grain offering. No complaints there.

I'm wondering if Hornady might be the easier choice, though. A flat based Amax bullet might be the obvious answer to getting a long, base heavy projectile for its weight...

[Aussie48]

Hi Guys,

Woodleigh Bullets here in Australia make a flat base specifications are .312 174gr Weldcore PP SN, SD .255 BC .362 I use them in my No1 Mk3, No4 Mk1 and No5 Mk1 as I shoot Military Rifle Club competitions and the Projectile has to be as close as possible to the original MKVII specs.
Just a thought, I believe they are available in the USA.

[jmoore]

I reckon if they could be persuaded to do 7,35 Carcano bullets, then .303" MkVII bullets ought to be a no brainer. I wonder what the minimum order quantity would be? Do a group buy.

It would appear that I'm not all that brand conscious, as the reply in Post #16 has nothing to do with Sierra. But I'd guess 80% of the jacketed bullets for reloading at the house are either Hornady or Sierra. Noslers would be the majority of the rest, but not much chance that they would do a flat based Ballistic Tip in for .303s...Great bullets but pricey, BTW. However that would be the "end-all, be-all" projectile!

[Snowy Owl]

The B.C. for the MkVII bullet is given in the 1929 Textbook as 0.255 for short (up to 1000yds) ranges.

Come to think of it today : Is it possible that this number (0.255) is the Sectional Density of the Mk VII bullet rather than its Ballistic Coefficient ?

[gsimmons]

Wiki( yes, I know) lists the BC of the Mk7 bullet at .467. For what it's worth.

[Snowy Owl]

That B.C. at .467 is too high - I think.

Because :

A- The ballistic coefficient of the Hornady Match 303 cal .312" 174 gr.BTHP bullet (#3130) is listed at .470
B- The ballistic coefficient of the Hornady 303/7.7mm (0.3105) 174 gr. FMJ-BT bullet (#3131) is listed at .470 too

Both bullets are boat tail bullets at .470 and the Mk VII is not a boat tail bullet. Something has to give somewhere. The ballistic coefficient of the Mk VII bullet has to be somewhat lower.

[Peter Laidler]

Brian................. are you thinking what I'm thinking?