I’ve written about the Hornet before (and I’ll give you a link to that past blog at the end of this one). The point of today’s writeup? It’s about accuracy and a few different loads for the Hornet in my single-shot No. 3 Ruger. I like the idea of a single-shot rifle and I love the .22 Hornet cartridge. The .22 Hornet was the world’s first centerfire .22 cartridge, and in its day, it was a real hot rod. Velocities range between 2400 and 2900 feet per second (sometimes a little more, depending on the load). Recoil and muzzle blast are nearly nonexistent compared to other centerfire cartridges, and it’s a fun cartridge to shoot.
A Ruger No. 3 in .22 Hornet. It has a period-correct inexpensive Bushnell 4X scope, which is good enough for me. My rifle is in near-new condition.
The idea for this blog started when I saw three boxes of Speer 33-grain hollow point bullets a couple a few weeks ago at my reloading supply depot. They were inexpensive (just $10 a box), so I bought all three. I hadn’t tried the light Speer bullets and I wanted to see how they compared to an old favorite, the 45-grain Sierra Hornet bullet. I also wanted to try a propellant that I had purchased previously (Lil Gun) and compare it to my favorite Hornet propellant (Winchester 296). And my good buddy Tom recently gave me a bunch of old .22 Hornet ammo that I shot up on a prior outing, so I had a good supply of Hornet brass. It all came together a week or two ago, and the result was a hundred rounds of reloaded .22 Hornet ammo in various load configurations.
The Sierra 45-grain jacketed soft point bullet on the left, and the Speer 33-grain jacketed hollow point bullet on the right.
The Ruger No. 3 was the low-alternative to the fancier Ruger No. 1 back in the day. The No. 1 had more figured walnut (in the 1970s, and maybe today, too), the No. 1 rifles with iron sights had fancier sights and a cool quarter rib, the No. 1 stock had a pistol grip and a rubber recoil pad, and the No. 1 had hand-cut checkering. The No. 3 was a simpler gun, with plain walnut, an aluminum (later plastic) buttplate, no checkering, and a less-fancy iron sight setup. In the 1970s, the No. 3 suggested retail price was $165, and you could buy them brand new all day long for $139. The No. 1 retail price was $265, and those could similarly be had for $239. Oh, how times have changed. New No. 1 Rugers sell for something like $1500 today, and Ruger stopped making the No. 3 altogether. It’s likely (in my opinion) that at some point in the not too distant future, Ruger will drop the No. 1, too. That’s okay; it will make mine more valuable. Not that I’m planning to sell anything. It just feels better knowing the value is going up.
Ruger manufactured the No .3 from 1973 to 1986. The very first one was chambered in .45 70 (a classic cartridge, to be sure), and then Ruger added two more classics: The .22 Hornet and the .30-40 Krag. Ruger built the rifle you see in this blog in 1978. Ruger No. 3 rifles can still be found on the used gun market, but these days they go for about the same price as a used No. 1, which is usually somewhere between $800 and $1000. Supply and demand, you know…they aren’t making any more No. 3 Rugers.
The Ruger No. 3 falling block action, with the lever open and the block in the retracted (or lowered) position.
The Ruger’s action is called a falling block because, well, it is. When you open the trigger guard/lever, the breechblock drops (it’s the silver thing you see in front of the trigger in the photo above), and that allows inserting a round in the chamber.
Ruger uses a distinctive font on its No. 1 and No. 3 rollmarks. This one is cool.The .22 Hornet is a cute round. These are loaded with 45-grain Sierra jacketed softpoint bullets.A sense of scale: .22 Hornet rounds next to a couple of .30 30 cartridges.Another sense-of-scale photo. From left to right, that’s a .416 Rigby cartridge with a 350-grain cast Montana bullet, a .300 Weatherby Magnum with a 180-grain jacketed softpoint bullet, a .45 ACP with a 230-grain jacketed roundnose bullet, a .357 Magnum with a 158-grain plated bullet, a .22 Hornet with a 45-grain jacketed softpoint bullet, another .22 Hornet with a 33-grain jacketed hollowpoint bullet, and a .22 Long Rifle with a 40-grain plated bullet.
The Hornet is fun to shoot, but it’s one of those cartridges that is tricky to reload (a couple of others are .30 Carbine and 9mm; they are challenging to reload for other reasons). Hornet brass is very thin (so you can’t reload it too many times and it’s easy to deform it when seating the bullet). It’s hard to get the bullets started straight during the seating operation, and the whole reloading process just takes a lot more finesse than does reloading most other cartridges. Everything is tiny. That being said, though, I like reloading Hornet ammo, especially when good groups are the result.
So how did it go? Not bad, I think. Here are the results:
The 33-grain loads show promise.
My testing wasn’t exhaustive, and I only shot at 50 yards on this outing. I tried a few new things with these tests. As mentioned above, the Lil Gun propellant and 33-grain Speer bullets were two of the variables, and both did well. I’d previously read that some shooters had better results using small pistol primers instead of small rifle primers, so tried that and it seems to be the case for me, too. The theory is that small rifle primers, combined with the Hornet’s small case capacity, may blow the bullet out of the case before the powder can get a good burn going. I don’t know if that’s the case or not, but the small pistol primers worked well for me.
The next steps for me will be to shoot these loads at 100 yards to see how the rifle does at that range. The scope on my rifle is an inexpensive Bushnell straight 4X and it’s quite a bit more clear at 100 yards (it’s just a little bit out of focus at 50 yards). We’ll see how that goes, and I’ll publish the results here. Stay tuned, my friends.
Stainless steel barrel, Parkerized finish, fixed sights, checkered wood grips, arched mainspring housing…the Springfield Armory Mil Spec 1911 gets the nod for the 2020 Colin D. MacManus Award to be presented later this year to a graduating cadet in the Rutgers University Reserve Officers Training Corps. We reviewed the offerings from several 1911 manufacturers and I have personal experience with the .45 autos from many of them. The Springfield Armory Mil Spec 1911 is the clear winner from several perspectives, not the least of which are accuracy, reliability, and close adherence to the US Army 1911 configuration. I own a Springfield 1911, and three of my good buddies bought this exact model. One of them is my friend Greg, and I’ve seen his gun shoot one-hole, 5-shot groups at 50 feet. With any handgun, that’s as good as it gets.
The MacManus .45 shipped yesterday from the Springfield Armory factory, and it is on its way (through a New Jersey FFL, of course) to its new owner. We’ll write about that when it happens, so stay tuned!
Two 5-shot groups I shot with my Compact RIA 1911 at 50 feet this weekend. I love the load, I love the Rock 1911, and I love the Pachmayr grips. These little snubbie 1911s are surprisingly accurate.
It’s no secret I’ve become a big admirer of the .45 ACP Rock Island Compact 1911. I worked through literally thousands of rounds and a number of personal preferences on mine and about the only thing left to mess around with was the grips. The standard wood grips on the Compact are okay, but I wanted better. The best grips I’d ever tried on any 1911 are the ones made by Pachmayr, and that’s what I wanted for my Rock.
It had been quite a few years since I bought a set of Pachmayr grips, and when I searched for them online I found that they appeared under the Lyman site. So I called Lyman. I learned Lyman acquired Pachmayr about 20 years go (shows how much I know, I guess). The guy on the phone was nice and he was able to answer my question, which was would their shorter grips fit the Rock Island Armory Compact’s frame (and the answer was yes).
Good buddy Greg had also purchased a Rock Compact based on my raving about it, and after Greg shot mine, he immediately purchased one for himself. Greg’s 1911 is completely unaltered (it has not had the custom work I had done on mine by good buddy TJ), but it shoots just as well. I had a few issues on mine; Greg’s had no issues or failures of any kind with his Compact 1911.
I told Greg a couple of weeks ago that I had ordered a set of Pachmayr grips for my Rock, and he ordered a set, too. I was out of town, so Greg got to shoot his Pachmayr-equipped Compact first. One of the Pachmayr grip emblems fell off on Greg’s gun his first time at the range with the new grips. That was not a good start. Greg has another full-sized 1911 with Hogue grips and he likes those, so he ordered a set of Hogues for the Compact. The Hogue grips have finger grooves in them, and Greg likes that feature. I don’t, but hey, different strokes for different folks.
Greg’s RIA Compact with Pachmayr grips.On his first range session with the Pachmayr grips, one of Greg’s grip emblems popped out. Mine hasn’t done that.Greg’s Compact 1911 with Hogue grips. Note the finger grooves. Note also that there’s no emblem to fall out.
I’ve been shooting my Compact 1911 with the Pachmayr grips and I love them. They give me a better grip on the little 1911 and I think they make the gun easier to shoot. And wow, it sure shoots well, especially with that 185-grain SWC bullet and the Bullseye load. That’s my go to load for this gun.
Where I’m going with all this is that this weekend I was able to try both Compact 1911s; one with the Pachmayr grips (that’s my gun) and one with the Hogue grips (Greg’s gun). Both feel great, but for me, the Pachmayr grips get the nod. They’re what I’m used to, I don’t care for finger grooves, and I like the checkered texture of the Pachmayr style. My grip emblems are staying put, so I haven’t had the issue Greg (and others, if you poke around a bit on the Internet) have had with theirs.
I shot a few targets on this past cold and windy Sunday morning at 50 feet, and I continue to be amazed at just how accurate the Compact 1911 is with my newly-discovered accuracy load (and that’s a 185-grain cast semi-wadcutter bullet over 5.0 grains of Bullseye with a CCI 300 primer). Surprisingly, Greg’s Compact fed the SWC bullets just as well as mine (my gun is throated and polished; Greg’s is in “as delivered” factory condition).
The bottom line? Either set of aftermarket grips is good (both the Hogues and the Pachmayrs). You wouldn’t be making a mistake with either.
One more thought: I think it would be cool if Rock Island offered the Pachmayr grips as an option with an inlaid Rock Island Armory emblem. That would work for me, and I’d buy the first pair if they ever offered them.
Want to see more on the Rock Compact, reloading .45 ACP ammo, and other shooting topics? There’s more good stuff here: Tales of the Gun!
The 147-grain 9mm Speer bullet next to a 124-grain cast roundnose bullet. Cool, huh?
Well, ol’ Gresh sure stirred up a hornet’s nest with that flat track blog yesterday. We nearly ran out of bandwidth!
On to a more metric subject: 9mm ammo.
I started the PRK 10-day cooling off period (you know, the People’s Republik of Kalifornia) for my new SIG P226 a couple of days ago. Let me tell you, if anybody thinks they are going to outlaw guns in California, they need to think again. I had to wait an hour and a half at our local Turner’s Sporting Goods store just to start the process. There were five guys working the gun counter and customers were lined up five deep. There were a ton of folks buying and picking up guns. Trying to outlaw guns in America is a nonstarter, even here in looney leftwing California.
This man had some of the best comments ever. “They know so much that just isn’t so” ranks high on my list.
Okay, enough of the rant about my friends who know so much that just isn’t so, to borrow a phrase from one of the greats, and on to the subject of this blog: Getting ready for the 9mm accuracy load development program I spoke about a few days ago. Like I said earlier, my standard 9mm accuracy load for years has been 5.0 grains of Unique behind a 125-grain cast bullet, but as part of my New Year’s resolutions I am moving in two directions simultaneously: I’m expanding my horizons in the 9mm world and I’m reducing my waistline. The waistline story can wait for another day; today’s topic is the loads I’m crafting for inclusion in the 9mm Comparo.
I’m going to evaluate three or four different 9mm handguns and several different loads, and I’ve started reloading the ammo for that. The first four loads I’ve already crafted are with two different bullets I haven’t tried before: The 147-grain Speer truncated metal jacket bullet, and the 115-grain Armscor FMJ bullet. The 147-grain Speer bullets are really cool looking. If they shoot half as good as they look I’ll be driving tacks with my new SIG!
A box of Speer 147-grain TMJ bullets. These are long bullets compared to what I normally shoot. They do look good.One of the 147-grain Speers ready for seating in a charged 9mm case.Another angle. Some of you folks get it. Stuff like this is beautiful. I mean, look at it: Polished brass, Unique propellant, and full metal jacket, heavy-for-caliber bullets. Life is good, folks. These loads are at 3.9 grains and 4.4 grains.
Seating the bullets is always cool, too. It’s where it all comes together.
On the way up, Rockchucker style……and on the way down. A new cartridge is born!
The finished rounds look great. Now the question is: Are they accurate? We’ll see. This is the first time I’ve tried a bullet this heavy in a 9mm.
You can’t think about the time you spend reloading ammo compared to the cost of factory 9mm ammo. It would be too depressing. We do it for the sheer enjoyment of making something. We’re recyclers. Maybe that’s why RCBS reloading gear is green. Al Gore and Ms. Thunberg have nothing on us!
I seated the Speer bullets to the recommended depth for an overall cartridge length of 1.120 inches. I’m trying a couple of different propellant charges. I can experiment with seating depth to find the best accuracy later if this combo shows promise.
I know. It’s an obsession. But it’s fun.
But wait: There’s more! I also picked up another bullet I had not tried yet, the Armscor 115 FMJ (full metal jacket) roundnose bullets. They are cool, too, and they were only $10 for a bag of 100 pills.
Armscor is the same company that makes Rock Island Armory guns, like my Compact 1911.
I’ve shot brass-jacketed FMJ bullets before, but that was in my .45 when I bought bulk Remington ammo just to get the brass cases (you know, so I could shoot them up and reload them later). These are good looking bullets, too.
Brass jacketed Armscor 9mm bullets. We’ll see how these do. I like the look..
The charges listed in my loading manuals for a 115-grain jacketed bullet with Unique propellant seemed to hover around a max of 5.5 grains with a minimum of 4.8 grains, so I prepped two loads, one at 5.4 grains and one at 5.0 grains.
5.4 grains of Unique in primed 9mm cases. You can’t load too much more; this charge nearly takes up the entire case volume. With the bullets seated, this will become what we call a compressed load. Unique is what is known as a flake powder…the individual grains are tiny flakes of propellant.
Here’s a cool shot of the finished Armscor load. I like the way these look. It’s like being the Lone Ranger, but with gold instead of silver bullets. Hi Yo SIG, away! (Cue in the William Tell Overture.)
Ready for accuracy testing. This, too, is nice looking ammunition.
If you are not a reloader yet, you might want to think about getting into it. To me, reloading is as much fun as shooting. And if you want to learn how to do it, take a look at our series on reloading .45 ACP ammo on the Tales of the Gun page!
The Gatling Gun, a book that tells the story of the original Gatling guns, their transition to modern gun systems, and several of the weapons platforms currently using Gatlings. It has been one of my most successful books ever. The Gatling Gun was picked up as the Book of the Month by the Military Book Club shortly after its publication and that made for a very healthy sales spike (and that was okay by me). It seems that every job I had after finishing college had something to do with Gatlings. I was on the Vulcan gun system in the Army. I was on the F-16 design team, an aircraft that flew with a 20mm Gatling. I worked on the Phalanx Close-In Weapon System at General Dynamics here in California. I was the Director of Engineering in the company that manufactured 30mm A-10 ammo. There’s more, but you get the idea.
Writing The Gatling Gun was a hell of a lot of fun, including visits to the Connecticut State Library (where the original Gatling and Colt archives, and many of the early Gatling guns, are stored). I handled original documents prepared by Samuel Colt and Dr. Gatling (and in the process, I became a licensed State of Connecticut historian). It was a hoot.
Of all the modern Gatling-equipped weapons of war, the most powerful is the A-10 Warthog, an aircraft armed with the mighty 30mm GAU-8/A Avenger cannon. Working for Aerojet, the company that manufactured the A-10’s 30mm ammunition, was one of the best jobs I ever had.
Today’s blog includes The Gatling Gun chapter on the A-10. I think you’ll enjoy it.
Chapter 11: The A-10 Thunderbolt Story
As the column of Soviet armored vehicles rolled across the open Eastern European plain, the lumbering sound of diesel engines and clanking treads drowned out all else. Russian infantrymen struggled to keep up, shouting to (but not hearing) each other. Suddenly, a roar different than that emanating from the tanks engulfed everything. It sounded like a powerful internal combustion engine (perhaps that of a race car) running at full throttle. The infantrymen started dropping as the tanks slowed to a stop. From the rear of the column, and working toward the front at an incredible rate, the ground erupted all around in 10-meter-wide explosions. Three of the tanks burst into flames, one blowing its turret off the hull. Black smoke was everywhere. An A-10 passed overhead, its 30mm Avenger gun continuing to roar, throwing out high-velocity depleted uranium penetrators and a 20-foot-long muzzle flash. The aircraft swung low as it passed the column. One of the infantrymen not killed in the first pass realized that the devilish craft was circling for another pass, and in addition to feeling raw terror, he suddenly felt very ill.
Of all the Gatling-gun-equipped aircraft flying today, one of the most intriguing is the A-10 Thunderbolt II. Nicknamed the Warthog by the crews who fly it, the A-10 is the first airplane designed from the ground up around a Gatling gun. It carries the most powerful Gatling gun ever built.
The Close Air Support Problem
The need for the Thunderbolt II and its very specialized mission was recognized during the conflicts in Korea and Vietnam. In these conflicts, U.S. aircraft were the best in the world for air-to-air combat. In the Korean War, these superb fighters included the F-86 Sabre, F-84 Thunderjet, F-80 Shooting Star, and F9F Panther. The F-4 Phantom, the F-111, the F-8, the A-7, and several others saw action in the Vietnam War. Vietnam-era tactical aircraft included such features as supersonic speeds, terrain-following radar, computer-assisted weapon delivery systems, and even such things as exotic as wings with adjustable sweep angles. One problem with these aircraft, however, was that they were designed primarily for air-to-air combat. This made them less than ideal for close-air-support missions (which support ground troops by engaging enemy ground targets). Having been designed for air-to-air combat, they had to be fast and maneuverable, and capable of flying at high altitudes. This placed constraints on the amount and kinds of ordnance that could be carried. Their high speed also meant the airplanes had a high stall speed, which detracted from accurately delivering ground fire.
In the close-air-support role, where the pilot would be required to engage ground targets in close proximity to friendly troops, inaccurate delivery systems were unacceptable. Most of the aircraft that flew in Vietnam were designed with late 1950s and early 1960s technology. During that era, vulnerability to small-arms ground fire was not recognized as a key design parameter. Unfortunately, this is precisely the environment in which close-air support aircraft must operate. In the Vietnam War, more U.S. aircraft were downed by small-arms fire than by any other means. There is even a confirmed case of an F-4 Phantom being shot down by a single rifle bullet.
The A-10 Warthog firing its 30mm Avenger cannon. This aircraft was actually designed around its powerful Gatling cannon. Each 30mm round has more muzzle energy than a World War II 75mm Howitzer!
The most significant drawback of existing close-air-support aircraft (i.e., those used in the close-air-support role prior to the advent of the A-10) was that they were ineffective against tanks. With enemy armor being one of the main threats to NATO forces in the European theater, military planners recognized that an aircraft with new capabilities was required.
The A-X Requirements
The close-air-support deficiencies the United States had observed during the Korean and Vietnam conflicts defined the need for the A-X aircraft in the mid-1960s (A-X stands for “Attack Experimental”). The air force initially envisioned a turbo-prop aircraft. The idea was that a current-technology version of the World War II Thunderbolt would best satisfy the requirements (note that World War II vintage Thunderbolts were used in a close-air-support role in Vietnam). The A-X specification was based primarily on deficiencies in existing aircraft. One of the requirements was an extremely accurate ordnance delivery system, because friendly ground troops could be within yards of the enemy. A high payload was also needed. As explained earlier, most existing tactical aircraft had been designed to maximize either maneuverability, speed, altitude, or some combination of these parameters. Payload had necessarily suffered.
The A-X aircraft also had to be able to remain in the air near the target for long periods of time, which is referred to as “loiter capability.” Existing tactical aircraft had been designed to operate at high altitudes. When flying at the low altitudes associated with close-air-support missions, they consumed excessive amounts of fuel. This translated to short loiter capabilities, which detracted from the effectiveness of close-air-support missions.
The air force also stipulated that the new A-X aircraft needed to have good “survivability” characteristics, meaning it should be relatively invulnerable to small-arms fire from the ground. To ensure that the aircraft met this requirement, the air force specified armor protection, redundant flight-control systems, and fire-suppression equipment.
The Armor Threat
The main requirement for the A-X aircraft, however, was that it be able to contribute significantly to the NATO defense of Eastern Europe, and that meant it had to be able to defeat tanks. (The Soviet Union and its Warsaw Pact allies had tens of thousands of tanks deployed along the East-European frontier. In any European combat scenario, the United States and the nations of Western Europe would have had to be able to defeat these tanks.)
To meet this threat, the United States developed (and continues to develop) many antitank weapons. These include shoulder-fired antitank weapons, large-caliber recoilless rifles, aircraft-delivered missiles and bombs, smart munitions, and several other systems. No U.S. aircraft, however, carried a gun system capable of defeating Soviet tanks.
The Flyoff Competition
In 1967 the U.S. Air Force solicited proposals from twenty-one companies to build a prototype A-X aircraft. After evaluating all of the proposals, it selected Northrop and Fairchild Republic as contenders to enter the final phase of the competition. As part of a new procurement policy, it funded both companies to develop aircraft meeting the A-X specifications. After Northrop and Fairchild finished building the prototypes, the air force conducted extensive tests prior to making a decision. During the competition, Northrop teamed with Ford Aerospace and Communications Company. Ford built the gun used in the Northrop aircraft, which was designated the A-9. Unfortunately for both Northrop and Ford, the Ford gun experienced many problems during the test program, including blowing up on at least one occasion. The antitank gun was the primary weapon for the A-X aircraft, and because the Ford gun (which was also based on the Gatling principle) performed poorly, the outlook for the Northrop A-9 was bleak.
A tank struck by GAU-8/A ammunition from the A-10 Thunderbolt. The GAU-8/A ammunition includes a mix of high explosive and depleted uranium projectiles.
Fairchild Republic teamed with the General Electric Armament Division to build the A-10. The A-10 carried a new 30mm version of the Gatling gun named the “Avenger,” which was based on the older 20mm Vulcan but was much more powerful. When General Electric became involved with the A-X program, it had nearly twenty years of development and production history with Gatling guns of various configurations. This experience was apparent during the test program, and the 30mm Avenger performed superbly. The A-10 rapidly demonstrated that it was a superior aircraft. The prototype flyoff competition ended in late 1972, and the A-10 was selected for a planned production run of 600 aircraft.
The A-10 Thunderbolt II
The A-10 Thunderbolt II is unlike any aircraft in the U.S. inventory. It is quite unconventional in appearance when compared to other tactical jet aircraft, and for good reason. One notably different aspect of the A-10 is its unswept wings. The stubby wings are straight to allow flying at the very low speeds required for the close-air-support role. Another striking difference is the location of the engines, which are mounted high above the rear fuselage. There are two reasons for this. One is better protection from enemy small-arms fire. Another is that the rear fuselage masks the engines’ heat signature, providing better protection from heat-seeking missiles.
The GAU-8/A 30mm Gatling gun. The size and power of the Avenger cannon are obvious in this photograph.
The A-10 has many other unique features that are not as readily apparent. One is a high degree of component and subassembly interchangeability. To the maximum extent possible, left and right components of the aircraft are identical, which considerably reduces the number of spare parts needed to support it. The interchangeable components include the engines, landing gear, rudders, and many parts of the wings and tail. The landing gear design is also unique in that when it is retracted, the main and nose wheels protrude slightly beyond the outline of the fuselage. This permits the A-10 to make emergency gear-up landings without damage. The A-10 is designed to survive small-arms fire. Control cables and hydraulic lines are routed so that one projectile could not inflict enough damage to make the aircraft unflyable. Another survivability feature is the cockpit design. The lower portion is surrounded by lightweight titanium armor to protect the pilot. The A-10 payload is quite impressive. In addition to 30mm ammunition, the A-10 can carry missiles, bombs, cluster bombs, and other munitions, for a total of up to 18,500 pounds of ordnance. This is approximately equal to the weight of the aircraft and is about double the payload of other aircraft used in the close-air-support role. Yet the A-10’s most intriguing feature is undoubtedly its 30mm Avenger Gatling gun.
The World’s Most Powerful Gatling Gun
The heart of the A-10 is its 30mm gun. The military designation for this gun is the GAU-8/A (the GAU is pronounced “gow,” and is an acronym for Gun, Automatic, Utility), and the A-10 was literally designed around it.
The GAU-8/A is a seven-barreled 30mm Gatling gun that weighs approximately 3,900 pounds fully loaded (or about 20 percent of the total aircraft weight). The gun is hydraulically driven and is fed through a double helix drum and ammunition feed system similar to that of the 20mm Vulcan (more on the feed and storage system later).
One way to appreciate the power of this gun system is to consider it in relation to the A-10. The gun is mounted to place the firing barrel on the exact centerline of the aircraft, and for good reason. When firing at the maximum rate of 4,200 RPM (it can also fire at a reduced rate of 2,100 RPM), the GAU-8/A generates about 19,000 pounds of recoil. To put this in perspective, consider the power of the A-10’s two fan turbine engines. Each of these generates about 9,000 pounds of thrust. When both engines are at full throttle, they generate a combined thrust of 18,000 pounds, which is less than the recoil of the GAU-8/A. In other words, when firing at maximum rate, more recoil force is generated by the GAU-8/A than by both of the engines operating at full throttle! The effect is quite noticeable, as the gun actually slows the A-10 when it is firing.
The A-10’s Avenger Gatling fires when each barrel when it is aligned with the centerline of the aircraft, which is why the cannon is offset to the aircraft’s left side.
The high recoil of the GAU-8/A gun is also the reason the firing barrel is along the aircraft centerline. If it were not, the A-10 would turn away from the target each time the gun fired. Aircraft carrying the 20mm Vulcan in an off-centerline position are also susceptible to this phenomenon, but the recoil of the 20mm gun is small enough to allow for compensation by offsetting the rudder a few degrees. This is normally programed into the flight-control computer and requires no action by the pilot. That approach would not work on the A-10, though. The GAU-8/A gun simply generates too much recoil.
The GAU-8/A Gun System
The GAU-8/A Gun System is made up of four subsystems: the gun, the ammunition feed and storage subsystem, the drive subsystem, and the electrical control subsystem. Specifications for the GAU-8/A gun system are presented in Table 11-1 and explained below.
The GAU-8/A gun is a seven-barrel Gatling-based automatic cannon (see the illustrations above). The gun subsystem consists of the following nine major components:
Rotor assembly. The rotor assembly is made up of the forward rotor (which accepts the barrels and is geared to the gun drive shaft) and the mid-rotor (to which the bolt guide tracks are mounted). The rotor assembly operates in the same manner and provides the same functions as that of other Gatling guns.
Housing. The housing serves as the basic frame of the GAU-8/A and provides a mount for many of the gun components (including the lubricator, ammunition transfer unit, solenoid assembly, firing cam,
rotor, and other components). It also contains the elliptical cam path that drives the bolts back and forth.
Barrels. The GAU-8/A has seven barrels. Each is 93.1 inches long and has 20-groove right-hand constant twist rifling (unlike the 20mm Vulcan, which uses a gain twist rifling pattern).
Bolts. Seven bolts are used on the GAU-8/A. They are similar to those used on the 20mm Vulcan, except they are much larger and use a percussion (instead of an electrical) firing system.
Transfer unit. The transfer unit is mounted to the right side of the housing. It feeds ammunition into the gun and accepts fired and unfired cases from it.
The GAU-8/A cannon and ammunition. This seven-barreled Gatling gun fires several types of 30mm ammunition. The ammunition has an aluminum cartridge case, nylon rotating bands (to increase projectile velocity and decrease barrel wear), and (in the tank-busting role) a depleted uranium penetrator warhead.
Lubricator. The lubricator is mounted on the upper rear portion of the housing. It contains a reservoir of lubricant, and each time the gun fires a small quantity is injected onto the bolt tracks.
Solenoid assembly. The solenoid assembly is also mounted on the housing and is used to withdraw the firing pin safety when the firing signal is sent to the gun.
Mid-barrel support and clamp. The mid-barrel support and clamp provides the forward mounting point for the GAU-8/A. It also locks the barrels in position within the rotor.
Muzzle clamp. The muzzle clamp provides structural support for the cannon and maintains concentricity of the barrel cluster.
Ammunition Feed and Storage Subsystem
The ammunition feed and storage subsystem is used to store and convey live and spent rounds (empty cartridges are not ejected out of the A-10). The nine major components of the subsystem are as follows:
Ammunition storage drum. The ammunition storage drum is similar in concept to the drum used for the 20mm Vulcan. It consists of an inner and outer drum, two scoop-disk assemblies, two drum-cover assemblies, and two spacer rings. The inner drum has a double-helix that forces the rounds forward or backward when the inner drum is rotated. Ammunition passes through the drum-cover assemblies for loading, unloading, firing, and returning fired cartridge cases to the drum.
Entrance unit. The entrance unit is mounted on the rear drum-cover assembly. It receives fired cases from the conveyor elements (explained below) and passes them into the ammunition storage drum.
Exit unit. The exit unit is similar in concept to the entrance unit. It mounts on the front of the ammunition storage drum and is used to feed live rounds into the conveyor elements.
Ammunition chuting. The ammunition chuting provides a path for the conveyor elements that carry ammunition to and from the GAU-8/A gun.
Conveyor turnaround unit. The conveyor turnaround unit feeds live rounds into the gun transfer unit (explained in the description of the gun subsystem). The conveyor turnaround unit also accepts spent rounds from the gun transfer unit and places them in conveyor elements for return to the ammunition storage drum.
Ammunition conveyor elements. The ammunition conveyor elements are linked together to form an endless belt that travels to and from the gun through the ammunition chuting. Each element carries one round of ammunition going to the gun and one spent case or unfired round when returning to the ammunition storage drum.
Drum drive unit. Mounted on the drum exit cover, the drum drive unit drives the ammunition storage drum.
Equalizer. The equalizer is mounted on the ammunition chuting approximately midway between the ammunition storage drum and the GAU-8/A gun subsystem. It equalizes the tension between the feed and return ammunition conveyor elements.
Loading access unit. The loading access unit is used to load ammunition into the storage drum. It is accessible through a panel on the left side of the A-10 (just forward of the wing).
Drive Subsystem
The drive subsystem is a hydraulic drive assembly consisting of the following major components.
Hydraulic drive motors. Two identical hydraulic drive motors provide power for the GAU-8/A gun and the ammunition feed and storage system.
Accessory drive gearbox. The accessory drive gearbox is driven by the hydraulic drive motors. It provides output torque for the gun and drum drive shafts.
Gun drive shaft. The gun drive shaft provides power to the GAU-8/A gun subsystem.
Drum drive shaft. The drum drive shaft provides power to the ammunition feed and storage subsystem.
Electronic Control Subsystem
The electronic control subsystem consists of the electronic control unit. This “black box” contains the circuitry that controls all GAU-8/A logic functions.
System Operation
When the A-10 pilot engages a target, the first step is to bring the armament control system to a state of operational readiness. Once this is done, the pilot must get the target in the Heads Up Display screen,
commonly referred to as the HUD. The HUD is a transparent screen mounted directly in the pilot’s line of sight. A small pipper (or bright spot) is projected onto the screen, and the pilot maneuvers the airplane (and consequently, the GAU-8/A gun) until the pipper is directly on the target. This allows the pilot to engage the target without having to divert his vision. This capability is critically important in a close-air-support aircraft, which must fly at low altitudes.
When the pilot wants to fire the GAU-8/A gun, he presses the control-column-mounted trigger. The trigger sends a signal to the electronic control assembly, which subsequently sends a signal to two solenoids mounted on the hydraulic drive assembly. When these solenoids open, aircraft hydraulic pressure is applied to the two hydraulic drive motors, and the gun, ammunition storage drum, and chuting begin to move. One-tenth of a second later, the electronic control assembly sends another signal to the firing solenoid assembly, which is mounted on the gun housing. This solenoid withdraws the safing sector from the firing cam path in the gun housing, which allows ammunition to begin the classic seven-step Gatling firing sequence. Each round fires as it reaches the firing point.
When the trigger is released, the electronic control assembly sends a reverse signal to the hydraulic drive assembly. The hydraulic drive motors reverse and rapidly decelerate the gun system. The gun system cycles in a reverse direction until all rounds are cleared from the cannon. This is done to prevent a cook-off (the inadvertent firing of a round due to absorption of residual gun heat), which could occur if a live round remained in one of the GAU-8/A’s chambers.
The 30mm Family of Ammunition
The success story behind the 30mm family of ammunition used in the A-10 is as intriguing as the story behind the A-10 and the GAU-8/A. When the air force began the A-X program, the intent was to manufacture the 30mm ammunition in government arsenals. In the past, the government usually bought ammunition components from several suppliers and then did the loading, assembly, and packing operations in a government load plant. In the early 1970s, the government estimated that the cost of each 30mm round would be about $75.
Aerojet Ordnance Company and Honeywell, Inc. (two munitions manufacturers) convinced the government that it would be best to allow private industry to manufacture the complete round. Under this procurement concept, GAU-8/A ammunition production has been enormously successful. Private industry was able to deliver high-quality ammunition at about $6 per round instead of the $75 the government originally planned to spend. To date, more than 80 million rounds have been procured. The 30mm family of ammunition consists of three different rounds, as explained below:
Target practice. The target practice (TP) cartridge is used for training.
Essentially a slug, the projectile has an aluminum nose and steel body.
High-explosive incendiary. The high-explosive incendiary (HEI) cartridge fires an explosive warhead with a point-detonating fuze. The projectile body is made of steel and contains .124 pounds of a high
explosive and incendiary mix.
Armor-piercing incendiary tracer. The armor-piercing incendiary tracer (APIT) cartridge fires what is probably the most intriguing of the 30mm projectiles. The APIT projectile has a depleted uranium
penetrator sheathed in an aluminum sabot. The depleted uranium penetrator has two functions. Because depleted uranium is a very dense metal, it defeats enemy armor through kinetic energy alone (the combination of high velocity and mass allow it to break through armor). Depleted uranium is also pyrophoric, meaning it burns with intense heat after it breaks up. These two characteristics make it extremely effective against enemy tanks. The rear of the projectile contains a pyrotechnic fumer, which reduces aerodynamic drag and allows it to maintain high velocities.
The normal GAU-8/A combat mix of ammunition consists of one HEI round for every five APIT rounds (TP ammunition is used solely for target practice and is not usually mixed with HEI or APIT ammunition). All types of 30mm GAU-8/A ammunition use aluminum cartridge cases (to conserve weight) and either plastic or copper projectile bands (to engage the rifling in the GAU-8/A gun barrels). The projectile bands permit higher muzzle velocity and reduced barrel wear.
The A-10 Bottom Line
All things considered, the GAU-8/A 30mm Gatling gun is one of the most interesting and successful applications of ground-attack aircraft ever developed. The GAU-8/A gun system is the most powerful Gatling gun ever built. The extremely lethal 30mm family of ammunition is an amazing procurement success story. The A-10, the GAU-8/A, and the 30mm family of ammunition still make up an important part of the U.S. national defense and will continue to for quite some time.
So there you have it: Chapter 11 of The Gatling Gun. There are 15 chapters in The Gatling Gun touching on all of the early Gatlings, their Civil War and Indian war deployments, the transition to modern high-rate-of-fire gun systems after World War II, and contemporary Gatling systems like the A-10 Warthog. If you liked our chapter about the A-10, you might enjoy the rest of The Gatling Gun.
This has been a fun year, and a fun year to be a blogger. When we started ExhaustNotes 18 months ago, we had no idea we’d get the loyal following we have, the number of hits we’re getting, and the number of comments we would receive from you, our amazing readers. In the past 18 months, we’ve published 572 blog posts (this is Blog No. 572), we’ve had something north of 200,000 page visits, and we’ve received 2,481 approved blog comments. We actually had quite a few more comments, but the spam comments are filtered out and we’re not counting those. And you spammers out there, thanks for all the biblical excerpts, the website optimization offers, the hairstyle stuff (seriously, you think Gresh or I need hairstyle products?), and the offers to manufacture stuff in and buy chotchkas from China. You guys keep it coming, and our filters will keep bouncing it. Hope springs eternal, I guess.
Our most commented upon post last year? It was Joe Gresh’s blog on Bonnier and the demise of Motorcyclist magazine, which really raked in some zingers. Nobody makes the written word come alive like Joe does, and that includes his opening line in that blog: The distance from being read in the crapper and actually being in the crapper is a short one. According to Dealer News, Motorcyclist magazine crossed that span this week.
Other ExNotes blogs that drew comments big time are our blogs on what constitutes the perfect bike, what the motorcycle industry needs to do to grow the market, dream bikes, and of course, the gun stuff. Keep your thoughts coming, folks. It’s what we enjoy the most.
Our most frequently visited blog post last year? Far and away, it was our piece on Mini 14 Marksmanship. Somehow that post got picked up by a service that suggests sites to people when they open their cell phones, and we were getting in excess of 10,000 hits a day for a few days on that one. Go figure. There must be a lot of people out there who want to shoot their Mini 14 rifles better. Glad to be of help, folks.
We’ve stepped on a few toes along the way. Some folks got their noses bent out of shape because we do gun stuff. Hey, let us know if you want your money back. One guy went away all butthurt because Google ads popped up mentioning President Trump and mortgage deals that I guess our President helped along. Hey, whatever. We don’t control the popups, and the Internet’s artificial intelligence does funny things with what it reads on the blog…I mentioned using my Casio’s backlight to help find my way to the latrine at night, and since that blog I’ve been getting an unending stream (no pun intended) of prostate treatment popups. I may click on a few of them. When you get your artificially-inseminated Google-driven popups, we’d like you to click on them, too. It makes money flow. To us. It’s what keeps us on the air, you know.
We did a lot of travel this year, but not as many motorcycle trips as we wanted. The Royal Enfields we took through Baja were fun, and we had a great story on that ride published in Motorcycle Classics. I really enjoyed riding and writing about the Genuine G400c. Joe did a great series on his Yamaha EnduroFest adventure, and he’s had articles published in Motorcycle.com. Joe did another series on motorized bicycles and it was a hoot.
Joe and I both did shorter moto trips this past year, and we both want to get more riding in next year. Gresh and I are going to do a moto trip to Baja in 2020, and we may get to visit with Baja John in Bahia de Los Angeles (that dude likes Baja so much he moved there). On any of the Mexico trips, we for sure will be insured with BajaBound Insurance, the best insurance there is for travel in Mexico. More good travel stuff? We published Destinations, a compendium of the travel stories appearing in Motorcycle Classics magazine, and it’s doing very well (thank you).
More plans? Gresh will be pouring more concrete, and I’ll be spending more time at the West End Gun Club. Joe is planning to maybe pick up the Zed resurrection again, and I’m pretty sure he’ll get that bike on the road within the next 12 months. We’ve got the upcoming 9mm comparo I mentioned yesterday, and for sure more gun articles. Good buddy Gonzo asked us to ride in the 2020 Three Flags Classic, and I’d like to make a go of that one this coming year (I was disappointed in myself for not riding that great event in 2019, but the circumstances just weren’t right). I think I’m going to write Tales of the Gun as a book and offer it for sale here on ExNotes, and maybe Joe Gresh will do the same with his collection of moto articles (and when he does, you can bet I’ll buy the first copy). We’ll be doing more product reviews, including movie and book reviews. I’m going to get on my bicycle more, and we may have some info on electric bicycles, too. You’ll read all about it right here.
So it’s a wrap for 2019. Susie bought a bottle of Gentleman Jack for me, and I’m going to pour a shot and watch 2020 roll in later tonight. To all of you, our best wishes for a happy and healthy 2020. Ride safe, ride often, and keep your powder dry.
Want to subscribe to our blog for free and never miss any of our motorcycle, travel, gun, bicycle, product review, and other blogs? We’ll never give your email address to anyone else, and you’ll never miss any of our stories! Sign up here:
I’ve been lusting over the SIG P226 Scorpion for some time now, and after a little bit of brushing up on my negotiation tactics, I pulled the trigger (figuratively speaking) on one this morning.
I like the looks of the SIG, I like that it is an alloy-framed handgun (I’m not a big fan of the plastic guns), and I like that it is a SIG. Good buddy TJ told me he believes these are the finest handguns available today, and he’s a guy who knows handguns. The US Army recently made their sidearm decision and it’s SIG. That’s a strong endorsement, I think.
I bought my SIG Scorpion at Turner’s, the gun will be in the store this Thursday, and that’s when I get to start the PRK (Peoples Republik of Kalifornia) 10-day waiting period.
My tried and trusty Model 59, the gun that got me hooked on 5.0 grains of Unique and a 125-grain cast roundnose bullet.
I’ve got a boatload of 9mm ammunition reloaded and ready to go, but that got me to thinking: What load might work best in the new SIG? I’d found in the past that 5.0 grains of Unique and a 125-grain cast roundnose bullet provided great accuracy in my Model 59, but then I got lazy and I stuck with that as my standard 9mm load in everything. I’ll be the first guy to tell you that to find the best load in any gun, you need to experiment and develop a load specifically for that gun. I have a couple of other 9mm pistols (a Springfield Armory 1911 and the Model 659 Smith and Wesson that I’ve blogged about before), and I’ve simply used my 5.0-grain Unique/125-grain cast roundnose in all of them. Is there a better load for each of these handguns?
The 659 with my 125 grain cast roundnose reloads.The Springfield 9mm 1911. It seems to like the 5.0 grain Unique/125-grain roundnose load, too.
So here’s what’s coming up: I’m going to do a load development comparo for the 659, the 1911, and the P226 to see where the accuracy lives for each gun. I’m thinking Unique, Bullseye, Power Pistol, the 147 grain Speer, the 125 gr cast RN Missouri, and maybe a 115 full metal jacket or hollowpoint bullet. I’m looking for inputs, so if you have a favored load for your 9mm handgun, let me know and I may throw it into the mix, too. Please add your suggestions to the Comments section here. I’ll keep you posted.
We’re thinking about another book, one that would include all of our Tales of the Gun stories and much more. What do you think? Let us know if you think you might have an interest in this new book to help us assess the market. In the meantime, you can see our other titles here.
10 shots at 50 feet with the Rock Island Armory Compact 1911. The secret sauce is a 185-grain cast SWC bullet, 5.0 grains of Bullseye propellant, a CCI 300 primer, and a 1.174-inch overall cartridge length.
I’ve been working lately on developing an accurate load for my Rock Island Compact 1911 with light target bullets, and I found one that works. One of my good buddies gave me a little over a thousand 185-grain semi-wadcutter bullets, and I found a great load for my Rock Island pistol. It’s the one I shot the targets with you see above.
The 185-grain cast lead SWC bullets used for the target above. The caramel-colored band around the bullet’s periphery is bullet lube, which prevents barrel leading and further enhances accuracy.
A bit of background info first: “SWC” (or semi-wadcutter) refers to the bullet configuration. A wadcutter bullet is one that is flat across the face of the bullet, and it is a typical target configuration for revolvers. What this means is that the bullet cuts a clean, circular hole through the target (much like a hole punch), making it easier to score. A semi-wadcutter bullet has a shoulder at the face of the bullet, but it also has a truncated cone of lesser diameter on the bullet face (it’s a “semi” wadcutter). It cuts a relatively clean hole, and it’s a bit more aerodynamic.
Loading .45 ACP ammo. It’s what I did this weekend, and I have 600 rounds ready to go.Finished ammo, ready to go. This ammo is custom tailored to my Rock Island Compact. It’s the most accurate load I’ve found in the Compact 1911. Every gun is different, and every gun needs a load tailored to it for best accuracy. This load is not particularly accurate in my full-sized Colt 1911, but it sure shoots well in the Compact Rock.
A semi-wadcutter bullet feeds easier in a semi-automatic handgun than would a wadcutter bullet, but you can still have problems with a semi-wadcutter in an automatic when the round enters the chamber. That’s not a concern in a revolver because you load the cartridges by hand (you do the chambering of each round manually when you load a revolver). It’s a potential issue in a semi-automatic handgun, though, because the cartridge has to ride up the ramp in the frame and feed into the chamber each time you fire the weapon, and a semi-wadcutter’s shoulder can cause the gun to jam. Generally speaking, for semi-autos roundnose bullet configurations feed the most reliably because the bullet tip guides the round into the chamber. Sometimes semi-autos work well right out of the box with semi-wadcutter bullets, and sometimes they don’t. If you want to make sure a semi-auto will feed reliably with a semi-wadcutter or a hollow point bullet, you have an expert gunsmith who knows what he’s doing polish the gun’s feed ramp, and throat and polish the entrance to the chamber. That’s what I had done on my Rock Island Compact by good buddy TJ, and my gun will feed anything.
Throated and polished, my Rock Island Compact is extremely reliable with any kind of bullet. You can read more about the way TJ customized my 1911 here.
During my load development effort, I tried these 185-grain cast SWC bullets with 4.5, 4.7, 5.0, and 5.3 grains of Bullseye, and 5.0 grains of Bullseye is the sweet spot. The other loads were also accurate, but the 5.0-grain load is the most accurate. The 5.3-grain load is accurate, too, but the recoil at that charge was a bit much for me. As mentioned in the first photo’s caption, cartridge overall length was 1.174 inches, and I used CCI 300 primers. A word to the wise on this: The load you see here is one I developed and it shoots well in my handgun. You should develop your own load. Always consult a reloading manual when you do so, and always start at the lower end of the propellant spectrum and carefully work up a load tailored to your firearm.
Folks tell me I need to buy a chronograph to measure bullet velocity, but hell, I don’t care how fast the thing is going, and I seriously doubt it would make a difference to any target. What I’m looking for is reliable function and accuracy, and with this load, I have it. A chronograph is one more thing I’d have to cart out to the range and screw around with once I got there, and I don’t want the hassle. But if you need to know, my Lyman Cast Bullet Reloading Guide tells me the velocity with this powder charge should be a little over 900 feet per second. That’s close enough for government work, I think.
The next step for the Rock, for me, is to add a set of Pachmayr checkered rubber grips. I have those on my full size 1911 and I like them a lot. That’s coming up, and I think the Pachmayr grip will further improve the Compact. I ordered a set today and when they arrive, you’ll read all about it right here.
You know, I like my Rock Island Compact. I’m on the range with it every week and I put a lot of lead through that short 3.5-inch barrel. It’s fun to shoot, it’s accurate, and it carries well. It’s become one of my all time favorite guns.
Want to read more on the Rock Island Compact 1911? Check out our other reports here:
I posted a series of blogs on my Ruger No. 1 in .257 Weatherby and the loads I was developing for it a few months ago, and I told you about the stock cracking on my rifle. That held things up for a while.
The original stock on my .257 Weatherby Ruger No. 1 cracked on the top and the bottom, just aft of the tang. I can repair this stock and use it, but Ruger provided a new stock on the warranty. Ruger customer service is top notch.
Ruger Customer Service
I was disappointed about the stock fracture, but the wizards at Ruger did a good job in selecting a piece of wood of comparable quality, figure, and tone. I also asked Ruger to return the defective stock to me after they installed the new one, and they did. And they didn’t charge me anything to put a new stock on the rifle (it was a warranty repair). Ruger sent photos of three stocks they had selected that were a good match for the forearm, and they allowed me to pick the one I wanted. More good news is that I believe the stocked crack can be repaired. I’m going to do that and maybe put it back on this rifle. Or maybe I’ll just have it as a spare.
Tang Relief
I believe the reason the original stock cracked is that the wood around the receiver tang had not been properly fitted (there should be a little clearance to prevent the tang from acting like a wedge to split the wood). I asked Ruger to make sure the new stock had some clearance behind the tang, and they did. They actually went a little overboard in my opinion, but that’s preferable to having no relief.
At my request, Ruger relieved the new stock to provide clearance between the receiver’s tang and the wood.
More good news is that I now have a load that reaches into the upper stratosphere of what the .257 Weatherby cartridge can do, and it does so with high velocity and great accuracy.
The New Ruger No. 1 Stock
First, allow me to show you the new lumber on the Ruger No. 1:
The new stock on my Ruger No. 1. Notice how well the stock matches the forearm.The left side of my new stock. It’s Circassian walnut.And the right side. The original stock had horizontal stripes, which I wanted Ruger to duplicate. They did a good job. They showed photographs of three stocks to me; this is the one I selected.
Here are a couple more shots to show the new stock, one in the gun rack and another on my workbench when I was cleaning the rifle:
Another view of the new stock. I love pretty wood. I selected this No. 1 because of the wood, and when the stock cracked, I was afraid that the replacement would not be as nice. But it was.And one more view. The rifle on the left is an unissued, unfired 1956 M44 Polish Mosin-Nagant. The one on the right is another Ruger No. 1, this one chambered in .300 Weatherby. Ruger has in the past offered the Ruger No. 1 in .257 Weatherby, .270 Weatherby, and .300 Weatherby, along with many other non-Weatherby chamberings. There are still a few new .257 Weatherby Rugers out there. They are destined to be collectibles.
A Mississippi Dave .257 Weatherby Load
I’d like to take credit for discovering the load on my own, but I can’t do that. My good buddy Mississippi Dave, who knows more about the .257 Weatherby cartridge than anybody I know, turned me on to Barnes solid bullets and H1000 propellant powder as the keys to success with this cartridge, and he was spot on in his guidance. Here are my results, all at 100 yards:
Those are great results, and 70.5 grains of H1000 is the load I am going to use with the Barnes bullets. I think I could have done even better, but conditions were less than ideal when I was shooting that day. There were a lot of guys on the range the day I was out there, including a couple of Rambo wannabees on either side of me with assault rifles and muzzle brakes shooting rapid fire. I know that’s what caused that third group with 70.5 grains of H1000 to open up to over an inch. I think the No. 1 could be a half-minute-of-angle rifle with this load. And this load in my rifle (the Ruger has a 28-inch barrel, 2 inches longer than normal) is probably attaining velocities well over 3700 feet per second. That’s smoking.
One quick additional comment on the above loads: These are loads that work in my rifle. Your mileage may vary. Always consult a reloading manual when you develop a load, and always start at the bottom of the propellant range and slowly work up. Barnes publishes their recommended reloading data, and you can go to their website to download that information.
Barnes Bullets
The high velocities mentioned above are only possible with Barnes’ solid copper bullets. Jacketed bullets (lead core bullets shrouded in a copper jacket, which is normally how bullets are constructed) would break up in flight at these higher velocities, and for me, they did (see the earlier .257 Weatherby blogs).
The bullets Mississippi Dave recommended. And wow, they worked superbly well.The Barnes bullets are solid copper. That’s all you can use if you hunt in California. The concern is that if you wound an animal and it later dies, it might be subsequently consumed by a California Condor, and if it had a lead bullet in it, the Condor might die of lead poisoning. I can’t make this stuff up, folks. Our politicians really believe this could happen.
.257 Weatherby Lessons Learned
I’ve learned a lot, with help from Mississippi Dave, about reloading the .257 Weatherby cartridge. You have to use solids (the monolithic Barnes bullets) to realize the full velocity potential of the .257 Weatherby. The .257 Roy can be extremely accurate, and at its upper-range velocities, higher velocities means more accuracy. Cup and core (conventional jacketed) bullets will work in the .257 Weatherby, but only at lower velocities, and if you’re going to do that, you’re not really using the .257 Roy the way it is intended to be used. Bore cleanliness is critical on these rifles, and because of the huge powder charges and high projectile velocities, the bore fouls quickly. When you reload for this cartridge, you not only need to full-length resize the cartridge case, you need to go in another 90 degrees on the resizing die after it contacts the shell holder in order to get the round to chamber. The best powders for this cartridge are the slow burning ones. H1000, in particular, works well in my rifle.
Earlier .257 Weatherby Blog Posts
The .257 Weatherby sage has been a long one but it is a story with a happy ending. If you’d like to read our earlier blogs on this magnificent cartridge, here they are:
If you enjoyed this blog and you want to see more, you can read our other Tales of the Gun stories here. And if you don’t want to miss anything from us, sign up for our automatic email blog notifications here:
I went to the range yesterday with two rifles, a Mosin-Nagant 91/30 and an M1 Garand. The Mosin was the Soviet Infantry’s standard rifle during World War II (it’s been around in various forms since 1891), and it’s one I’ve always enjoyed shooting. The Garand is a US weapon developed in the 1930s and first used by our troops in World War II. It is a semi-automatic rifle, which gave us a tremendous advantage over the enemy forces we fought (their rifles were bolt action).
My Mosin-Nagant 91/30. I refinished the stock, glass bedded the action, and developed a load shown in the photo below. This rifle is superbly accurate.
I enjoy getting out to the range, and yesterday was a beautiful day. Sunny, cold, and not too windy. I shot on the 100-yard range, first with the Mosin and my standard load for that rifle.
There are only four holes, but the one just below the “10” is actually two shots. This rifle is so accurate it is almost boring.
After five shots, I put the Mosin away. It’s almost too easy with that rifle. I had a good target, I thought I would get a photo for the blog, and I was eager to try the Garand.
My Garand is kluge rifle assembled with parts from a series of mismatched manufacturers. The receiver is a CAI (considered to be of inferior quality to the ones made by the standard US suppliers Winchester, Harrington and Richardson, and Springfield Arsenal), the trigger group is from Beretta, and the barrel is a 1955 RSC (presumed to be Italian). I’ll state up front I don’t know a lot about Garands, and the reasons I bought this one (my first and only Garand) is I liked the finish, the price seemed right, and the money was burning a hole in my pocket that day.
My mutt Garand. I enjoy shooting this rifle. There’s a lot going on with each shot, and it’s powerful.
Shooting the Garand well has been a challenge for me. I like shooting with iron sights, but I’m a post-and-slot guy. I haven’t had a ton of experience with aperture sights, and that’s taking some getting used to. Then there’s the issue of a decent load. I’ve been playing with different loads for the Garand, and I found three loads that work well. On my last outing, I had a few shots that were low left on the target outside the bullseye, and one of our readers asked if those shots were either the first or last shots from each clip. I didn’t know at the time because I shot each en bloc clip of 8 rounds without looking at the target after each shot.
My objective yesterday was to answer the above question, and sure enough, I did. My shots grouped well except for the first shot from each clip. I shot three clips (for a total of 24 rounds), and in each clip, the first shot hit low left.
My Garand’s performance at 100 yards. There are 24 shots on this target. The rifle groups well with this load, but the first shot from each en bloc clip of 8 rounds goes low and to the left.
The challenge now is to determine the reason why that first shot from each clip is going low. I posted the target you see above in a Garand group asking for input on why the first round from each clip went low, and as you might guess, the answers were all over the map. Most responses served only to illustrate that people don’t read very well, but a few were informative. A couple said their rifles behaved the same way and it was predictable enough (as is the case with mine) to allow for simply aiming high right for the first shot from each clip to put all 8 rounds in the black. One response suggested that the bolt may not be closing fully, as the first round is chambered by manually releasing the op rod, while all subsequent rounds are chambered when the action is cycled by the gun gases. I think that guy is on to something, and that will be where my future focus is going to be. If you have any ideas, I’d sure like to hear them. Leave a comment if you have the answer, and thanks in advance for any inputs.
grips. These little snubbie 1911s are surprisingly accurate.
Our most commented upon post last year? It was Joe Gresh’s 
We’ve stepped on a few toes along the way. Some folks got their noses bent out of shape because 
We did a lot of travel this year, but not as many motorcycle trips as we wanted. The Royal Enfields we took through Baja were fun, and we had a 
