WHY HANDLOAD?

By

Craig Boddington

Like most kids, my first shooting was with a single-shot .22, but, absent a modern Kansas deer season, we were shotgunners, no need for centerfire rifles. Couple hundred miles southeast, Warsaw, Missouri, had a sign proclaiming it “Gunstock Capitol of the World,” home to both the E.C. Bishop and Reinhart Fajen gunstock companies. There, my Dad’s friend Jack Pohl, owner of Bishop’s, was an avid benchrest shooter, big-game hunter, and handloader.

As a youngster, Boddington did almost all of his hunting with handloads, secure in the belief he could build a better cartridge than he could buy. His first “good” mule deer was taken in 1978 with a Ruger .30-06 using 180-grain Nosler Partition and a near-max charge of IMR 4350. The shot was about 450 yards, a very long poke back then.

Mr. Pohl was enlisted to introduce us to the centerfire rifle world. I was probably 12. The deal: He’d take us to the range, and woodchuck shooting. As a graduation exercise, we’d join him on a pronghorn and deer hunt in Wyoming. Big stuff! First, I had to learn how to handload. We started on his bench, then got a basic setup in our basement. Dad knew how to supervise his young son, but I did all the loading. I loved it, spent countless hours with that green RCBS press. Sixty years later, it’s not my only press, but I still use it.

Back then, there were two primary rationales for handloading. First, save money. Second, more important: It was an article of faith that you could load better ammo than you could buy.

Going back 60 years, Boddington has spent countless enjoyable hours at the loading bench. This is his new bench with new Hornady tools, but he still has—and uses—a lot of the reloading equipment he’s had since he was a teenager.

Today, both arguments hold less water. Ammo was cheaper back then, so were the basic tools and components. Even then, you had to do a lot of shooting to amortize the equipment. Of course, handloading drives you to shoot more, not a bad thing. You must try this load and that and keep searching for a better combination.

Today, I’m shocked at the cost of factory ammo. However, reloading components and equipment have also gone up (like everything else). Buying in bulk, especially powder and primers, reduces the per-cartridge cost. Still, it takes a lot more shooting to break even.

This is Boddington’s lifetime-best group, .052-inch with an 8mm Remington Magnum and a carefully-worked up handload. Groups like this are uncommon with anything, but most attainable through careful, precise handloading.

I started handloading in the Sixties. By the Nineties, factory ammo was so good, and so varied, that it was no longer a given it could be beat…depending on your purpose, and how serious you are. For ultimate accuracy, such as benchrest, long-range, and precision shooting, carefully concocted handloads usually win.

No matter how good, any factory load is just one assemblage of the four components: Case, primer, propellent, projectile. Changing any of them can make a difference in any rifle. In handloading, you can vary all of them, almost endlessly. Different brands and strengths of primers. Even cases vary among the brands. When I was young, our primary choices in bullets were Hornady, Nosler, Sierra, and Speer. More brands today, more weights and shapes. Back then, we might have had two dozen propellants to choose from, including pistol, rifle, and shotgun powders. Today, into the hundreds, new ones all the time.

The .348 Winchester is one of Boddington’s favorites. Into the 1980s, components were relatively available with multiple choices. Today both ammo and .348-inch bullets are scarce; handloading is the only sensible option for uncommon cartridges.

I’ve always been a lazy handloader. My searches for perfect loads have rarely been exhaustive. I tend to use the cases I have (and, today, the primers I can get), and there are plenty of bullets and powders I’ve never tried. Still, I work up loads for my rifles. I experiment with different powders and bullets, varying charge weight and seating depth. As good as factory ammo is today, I can usually build a more accurate load than I can buy…if I care to try.

I don’t always try. Maximum accuracy isn’t always essential. I’m not a competitor, mostly a hunter, and some of my rifles, older lever-actions and double rifles, are specialized in purpose and limited in range. I can beat factory loads, but not by enough to increase performance.

This Uganda buffalo was taken with a .470 made in 1906, firing a handloaded 500-grain Hornady DGX-Bonded. Since volume is low, factory ammo is currently scarce for most big-bore cartridges.

By the Nineties, factory ammo had gotten so good, and the choices so varied, that I wasn’t loading much anymore. A few years later, not at all. For some years my loading gear was boxed up. Thank God, I kept it!

I restarted mostly because I missed my time at the bench. Cost and performance aside, my single greatest reason for handloading: It’s fun! It is a mindless exercise, except you must stay focused. Do that, inspect constantly, use common sense (and loading manuals), and you can’t get into too much trouble. The results are wonderfully satisfying. I get a huge kick out of shooting a nice, tight group. Even better when it’s a load I cooked up. As a hunter, I still get the same old thrill from taking an animal. Rifles matter to me, so it’s better with a special rifle. Better still with a load I’ve worked up for that rifle and hunt.

Son-in-law Brad Jannenga used Boddington’s Savage 99 in .300 Savage with handloaded Swift Scirocco to take this big Axis buck. Tens of thousands of .300 Savage rifles are still in use…but the majors haven’t done runs of ammo in several years. Handloading is the best answer for many older cartridges.

As we know, things have changed. I didn’t foresee the late-teens ammo shortages, and for sure I didn’t anticipate that nasty little virus. My loading bench kept me sane through the pandemic…and still keeps me in business. Supplies are getting better, but still aren’t right. I’ve been out of standard large rifle primers for months, using magnum primers and dropping the load a wee bit. For sure I can’t always find the exact bullet or propellent I want.

Fortunately, there are lots of choices, usually something out there will work. Just the other day, I shopped this site, found two of three propellant I needed (not bad), and bullets I’d been looking for. Things are getting better…depending on what you shoot. On the shortages: I am not a conspiracy theorist. I put it down to increased demand. Millions of new shooters buying ammo, and that’s a good thing. Also, panic buying and hoarding. I believe the ammo makers are doing their best to catch up. However, it costs gazillions and takes time to gear up for unprecedented demand. This must be done with caution…because peak demand has already subsided.

Boddington isn’t a blackpowder guy but needed to work up loads for his son-in-law’s .500 Black Powder Express, made in 1885. This hog was taken with a 440-grain Hawk bullet with smokeless equivalent load…and lots of Dacron pillow stuffing to keep the powder down on the primer.

The biggest problem for many of us: The catchup process has focused on cartridges with the highest demand and deepest backorders. Outlets are awash in .223, 6.5 Creedmoor, and .308 ammo. I shoot them, but I also shoot older cartridges. Plenty rifles still out there, but factory ammo is scarce because the majors haven’t done runs in years: .250 and .300 Savage, .257 Roberts, .303 British, .348 Winchester.

Handloading has been my salvation. I also use several large-caliber cartridges: .405 Winchester, .450/.400-3”, .450 and .470 Nitro Express. Now we’re down to limited suppliers…and few or no recent runs. PHs all over Africa are dying for ammo (almost literally). So am I. I have great faith in my handloads, no qualms about hunting with them. Except, on dangerous game I prefer to use fresh factory ammo. If something bad happens, just as soon the post-mortem does not suggest it was my handload’s fault. In ’21 I wanted to use a new-to-me but very old .470 on a buffalo hunt in Uganda. Couldn’t find any fresh .470 factory ammo to save my soul. No problem, I’ve had dies since 1980. Getting a double rifle’s barrels to shoot together can be tricky. Got lucky, this rifle responded to a standard recipe. Took two nice bulls with my handloads, great performance and extra fun.

With double rifles, the challenge is getting the barrels to group together. This 1895 double in .303 British has been a treat. Regulated with 215-grain bullets, it also prints well with lighter bullets at the same velocity. These pairs represent changes in sight elevation.

As a lazy handloader, I’ve generally resisted complex projects. This is my primary reason for avoiding wildcat or non-standard cartridges. Slothfulness aside, I think we have enough standard factory cartridges to choose from. However, with shortages and interrupted supplies, sometimes handloading is the only solution. Gotta have dies, but even with non-standard cartridges, custom dies can be made (extra-simple if you have fired cases from the chamber)

Again, I try to stay out of this game, but recently I’ve had some unusual handloading projects. I bought a .50-115 Sharps from a dying friend. No factory ammo for that one, but the rifle came with cases, dies, and a bullet mold. That one has been fun. I’m not a blackpowder guy, nor a cast bullet guy, but it shoots well with a 515-grain cast bullet and Tin Star, a blackpowder-equivalent propellent that I’d never even heard of before.

The .348 Winchester is one of Boddington’s favorites. Into the 1980s, components were relatively available with multiple choices. Today both ammo and .348-inch bullets are scarce; handloading is the only sensible option for uncommon cartridges.

Although scarce today, the .303 British isn’t rare. My rifle is a very old double, regulated for the old 215-grain bullets. Woodleigh in Australia still made them, but their factory had a major fire. I found a supply, am hoarding them. Took some work, but I have loads that regulate well with 150 and 174-grain Hornady as well as the 215-grain Woodleigh. In May, I shot a nice Alberta black bear with the old double and 215-grain handloads. Awesome penetration, sort of double the fun!

A nice Alberta bear, taken with double in .303 British, firing a handloaded 215-grain Woodleigh. This was the original .303 bullet weight, so this hundred-year-old rifle was regulated with that bullet weight.

The biggest recent project: My son-in-law bought an 1885 exposed hammer double in .500 Black Powder Express (BPE). Of course, no ammo, but there are bullets, and case dimensions are the same as for .500 Nitro Express. This one has been a nightmare, but we’ve got both barrels shooting together with a mild charge of smokeless IMR 4198 and about 15 grains of Dacron pillow stuffing on top of the powder. Between poor light and my fading eyes, it took several outings, but I finally pounded a wild hog with it. If there’s an ammo problem, handloading can almost always solve it…and it’s fun!

THE SHORT, FAT CARTRIDGE

Creating a new cartridge is complex and expensive; it is simpler and cheaper to modify existing cases. Performance characteristics can be changed by necking the case up or down, changing shoulder angle and body taper, and by shortening or lengthening the case. Such modifications create “families” of cartridges based on a parent case.

By

Craig Boddington

Creating a new cartridge is complex and expensive; it is simpler and cheaper to modify existing cases. Performance characteristics can be changed by necking the case up or down, changing shoulder angle and body taper, and by shortening or lengthening the case. Such modifications create “families” of cartridges based on a parent case.

This awesome group was fired from a .300 WSM when the cartridge was first introduced. Short, fat case design is conducive to accuracy, but good barrels and consistent ammo is more important. The short, fat concept is really more about efficiency

Peter Paul Mauser created an extensive family of cartridges based on his 1888 7.92x57mm cartridge. Our .30-06 has a longer case, but rim and base diameter are suspiciously similar to Mauser’s case. (Actually, our 1903 Springfield action was so similar to the Mauser that Uncle Sam paid Mauser a royalty until WWI.) To this day, the majority of unbelted rimless cartridges are based on the .30-06’s .473-inch rim and base diameter. These include .270, .35 Whelen, and Hornady’s 6.5mm (and 6mm) Creedmoor.

Since its introduction in 1912, the .375 H&H Magnum case, with .532-inch rim and belt, has served as the parent for almost all belted cartridges. The only exceptions have been Weatherby’s smallest cartridges (.224 and .240 Wby Mag); and their largest cartridges, based on the big .378 Wby Mag with .582-inch rim and belt.

Proving that short and fat isn’t everything and extreme velocity can produce accuracy, this group was fired with a Lazzeroni 7.82 (.308) Warbird, 4000 fps with a 130-grain Barnes X bullet.

Earlier cartridges tended to have a lot of body taper and gently sloping shoulders. With new smokeless powder pressures, both features were thought essential for smoother feeding and reliable extraction. One of the most archaic of all case designs still around is the .300 H&H. Introduced in 1925 by necking down the .375 H&H case, the .300 uses the full 2.850-inch case, lots of body taper, and a long, gentle 8.5-degree shoulder. From today’s perspective, we reckon there’s no way it will shoot well or fast. Except it does both. The .300 H&H became popular when Ben Comfort used it to win the 1000-yard Wimbledon match in 1935. With good handloads, velocity is surprising, and that long, tapered case literally flies into the chamber.

 Boddington took this javelina in 2002 with a .243 WSSM, when the WSSM cartridges were introduced. Fast and efficient, they do what they’re supposed to do, but didn’t become popular and have nearly vanished…perhaps because of feeding issues in many platforms.

By this time, gun tinkerers had discovered that powder capacity and efficiency could be enhanced by removing body taper and sharpening shoulder angle…with little impact on feeding and extraction. The resulting non-standard cartridges were called “wildcats.” P.O Ackley (1903-1989) was one of the most prolific experimenters. He messed with every known case and bullet diameter but, rather than reinvent the wheel, his cartridges were mostly “improved” by removing body taper and sharpening shoulder angle, thus increasing velocity.

Ackley’s rule for an “improved” cartridge: Standard factory ammo could still be used, the result a fire-formed case. The .280 Ackley Improved has been his most popular, now loaded by several companies. Based on the .280 Remington with sharp 40-degree shoulder, the .280 AI duplicates 7mm Rem Mag performance, but in a more compact case while burning less powder.

In the 1990s John Lazzeroni got the majors thinking with his fat-cased Lazzeroni Magnums. His long cartridges are perhaps best-known, but it was his short, fat cartridges that got things going. Left to right: 7.21 (.284) Spitfire; 7.82 (.308) Patriot; 10.57 (.416 Maverick).

Roy E. Weatherby (1910-1988) also started as a wildcatter. Weatherby’s initial cartridges were based on the .300 or .375 H&H case, necked this way and that, sometimes shortened, always with body taper removed to increase powder capacity and velocity. His flagship cartridge, the .300 Wby Mag, wasn’t the first but, since it used the full-length case, it was essentially just one of various “improved” versions of the .300 H&H. The Weatherby difference is Roy’s distinctively curved “double Venturi” shoulder. The effect of this is still debated but, for sure, the Weatherby Magnums were, by bullet diameter, the fastest cartridges out there.

Boddington and noted Ruger collector Lee Newton with a fine Kansas whitetail, taken with Ruger No. One in .280 Ackley Improved. The most popular of P.O. Ackley’s many cartridge designs, his .280 AI has become extremely popular.

In fact, the only the way to get higher velocities is to use a bigger case. Problem is, you quickly get into over bore capacity. This can be likened to a water hose. A hose can only pass so much water. You can increase pressure, but at some point you reach diminishing returns and not much more water comes out of the hose. In a rifle barrel, that point of diminishing return is over bore capacity. You can use a bigger case and burn more propellant, but you can’t get much more velocity. You’ll start to see this with unburned granules of powder spewed in front of the muzzle, but the real problem is throat erosion and reduced barrel life.

So long as we use nitrocellulose-based propellants, we can’t get much faster than Weatherby’s 1940s velocities. Nitrocellulose expands (burns) at about 5000 fps. This sets a practical limit, but you can’t get there because of friction. The .220 Swift broke 4000 fps in 1935. To this day, only a handful of commercial cartridges exceed 4000 fps, none by much, and all with short barrel life.

Boddington took this javelina in 2002 with a .243 WSSM, when the WSSM cartridges were introduced. Fast and efficient, they do what they’re supposed to do, but didn’t become popular and have nearly vanished…perhaps because of feeding issues in many platforms.

So, no matter how much superheated gas you pour down your barrel, unprecedented velocity is not the result. You can, instead, go for efficiency, and that’s a primary concept behind today’s short, fat cartridges. We learned from tank cannons that burning efficiency is achieved when the primer flame can access a greater percentage of the propellant charge. Burning efficiency is conducive to accuracy. More important: More energy per grain of powder burned. For instance, with a 180-grain bullet, the .300 Wby Mag needs 70.9 grains of IMR4350 powder to reach 2900 fps. The .300 WSM needs just 62.1 grains of the same powder. That’s ten percent more propellant—more heat, more recoil—to reach the same result.

The .308 Win is based on the .30-06 case shortened from 2.494 inches to 2.015 inches. At some point case capacity tells; the .308 is not as fast as the .30-06. However, it’s only about seven percent slower…while burning 20 percent less propellant.

For sheer efficiency, the perfect cartridge case is as wide at the base as it is long. No such cartridge exists because no known action can feed such a thing. However, there are fatter cartridge cases. A longtime favorite has been the .404 Jeffery case, an unbelted rimless cartridge with a .543-inch rim and base. The .416 Rigby case is even fatter, with a .590 rim and base.

Hornady’s growing PRC family, all based on the .375 Ruger case. Left, the just-released 7mm PRC, case shortened to house the longest bullets in standard actions. Center, the original 6.5 PRC, suitable for short actions. Right, the .300 PRC, possibly suitable for standard actions, but requiring a full-length action for the longest .308 bullets currently in use.

In the late Eighties Tucson wildcatter John Lazzeroni started developing fat-cased wildcat cartridges, creating parallel lines of long and short-cased Lazzeroni Magnums. Most use similar dimensions to the .416 Rigby, but some use the .404 Jeffery. As Roy Weatherby did in the 1940s, Lazzeroni made the big boys nervous.

Manufacturers liked the concept and the performance, but most production bolt-actions cannot house the big Rigby case. So, the big boys did their own things. Remington struck first with the long Remington Ultra Mags, based on the .404 Jeffery case. First the .300 RUM in 1998, then 7mm, .338, and .375 RUM two years later. Good and fast cartridges, all needing .375 H&H-length actions. Winchester struck back with the .300 Winchester Short Magnum, 2.1-inch case for short actions. The RUMs have a .550 base, with the rim slightly rebated to .534. Winchester’s WSM case is similar, but not the same: .555-inch base, rim rebated .535.

Remington quickly added 7mm and .300 Remington Short Action Ultra Mags, sized to fit their little Model Seven action. Soon we had four RUMs, two RSAUMs, and four WSMs…plus three Winchester Super Short Magnums (WSSMs). To my thinking, this was a large and confusing array of new cartridges. The .300 WSM has become the most popular, but several of these cartridges are languishing and the WSSMs vanished quickly. The short, fat cartridges are efficient, but remember my comment about actions for the ideal “triangular” cartridge?  All the short, fat cartridges show feeding issues in some platforms, and I believe this is what killed the WSSMs, too short and fat for many actions.

: This huge feral hog was taken with a Lazzeroni 10.59 (.416) Maverick. Maybe too much gun, but the proprietary Lazzeroni short magnums are still the fastest in their class.

In 2007 Hornady introduced the .375 Ruger. It was successful, but its case design is brilliant: .532-inch rim and base, same as the rim and belt of the .375 H&H but, absent belt, more case capacity. Also, easy to manufacture: Same bolt face as a belted magnum, and untroubled feeding in most actions.

The .375 Ruger case quickly spawned the .416 Ruger and, shortened, .300 and .338 Ruger Compact Magnums (RCMs). These have not been especially popular, but recently, the .375 Ruger case was used for Hornady’s PRC (Precision Rifle Cartridges). Specified for faster-twist barrels and intended for use with modern extra-heavy, extra-long, super-aerodynamic bullets, there are now three PRCs: 6.5, .300, and the just-released 7mm PRC. 

The three PRCs are designed for maximum efficiency and to avoid over bore capacity. Interestingly, case lengths are different. 6.5 PRC is a short-action cartridge. .300 PRC uses the full (2.5-inch) .375 Ruger case. With the longest and heaviest bullets, it really needs a full-length action. The 7mm PRC splits the difference with a 2.280-inch case, allowing it to be housed in standard (.30-06) actions with extra-heavy 180-grain 7mm bullets.

Nosler cartridges: The Nosler family of cartridges, now 26, 27, 28, 33, and 35 Nosler, are all based on the RUM/.404 Jeffery case. The 26 (6.5mm) Nosler was first. So far, the 28 (7mm) Nosler has been most popular, now loaded by multiple major manufacturers.

The PRCs aren’t alone in being specific to actions lengths and bullets. Starting in 2012 with the 26 Nosler, Nosler’s family has now grown to five siblings: 26, 27, 28, 30, and 35 Nosler, all based on the RUM (.404 Jeffery) case shortened to 2.5 inches. all intended as standard-length-action cartridges. Most popular so far has been the 28 Nosler, calling for faster rifling twist, and now loaded by multiple manufacturers,

Winchester’s 6.8 Western takes a different approach. Based on the .270 WSM case shortened, it is designed for short actions, so is sort of an extension of the WSM family. Except: It calls for fast-twist barrels, and is designed for the new, extra-heavy .277 bullets up to 175 grains.

In 2022, the somewhat fatter (and sometimes short) case is still in vogue, but current cartridge design is more specific to actions, bullets, and rifling twists than ever before.