DEEREHART said

Louis Luttrell said
Hi Bert-
I honestly don't know... 
This came from my trolling the McCracken digital library for M70 related stuff...  I'm sure you noticed that I "oversimplified" my description, as the second pic is actually a 1938 extraction of centerfire calibers that had been discontinued since the 1930 version.  Still it showed the M54 bore specifications from 1930, which is why I posted it...
I wish the McCracken library had the time/personnel to make their holdings useful/accessible... Insofar as I can tell it's hopeless unless you have the time (and influence) to be permitted to go through the MS20 (WRACO records) yourself...  If only there were a knowledgeable Winchester "historian" who could take a Sabbatical and spend a year bringing order to what (I think) is a disorganized mess...
Lou
  

Lou
I see what you did there.....historian...Sabbatical....research, Old White Bearded one. 
Bert are you listening?
Doug
  

I got that hint... but I am not biting on it!

Louis Luttrell said
Hi Bert-
I honestly don't know... 
This came from my trolling the McCracken digital library for M70 related stuff...  I'm sure you noticed that I "oversimplified" my description, as the second pic is actually a 1938 extraction of centerfire calibers that had been discontinued since the 1930 version.  Still it showed the M54 bore specifications from 1930, which is why I posted it...
I wish the McCracken library had the time/personnel to make their holdings useful/accessible... Insofar as I can tell it's hopeless unless you have the time (and influence) to be permitted to go through the MS20 (WRACO records) yourself...  If only there were a knowledgeable Winchester "historian" who could take a Sabbatical and spend a year bringing order to what (I think) is a disorganized mess...
Lou
  

Lou

I see what you did there.....historian...Sabbatical....research, Old White Bearded one. 

Bert are you listening?

Doug

I honestly don't know... 

This came from my trolling the McCracken digital library for M70 related stuff...  I'm sure you noticed that I "oversimplified" my description, as the second pic is actually a 1938 extraction of centerfire calibers that had been discontinued since the 1930 version.  Still it showed the M54 bore specifications from 1930, which is why I posted it...

I wish the McCracken library had the time/personnel to make their holdings useful/accessible... Insofar as I can tell it's hopeless unless you have the time (and influence) to be permitted to go through the MS20 (WRACO records) yourself...  If only there were a knowledgeable Winchester "historian" who could take a Sabbatical and spend a year bringing order to what (I think) is a disorganized mess...

Lou

Mike

1- 30 grs    1,272 fps  Cold bore  Ambient temp was 61 degrees.

2- 30.5 grs  1,446 fps  has a slight extractor rub from pressure.

3- 31 grs     1,417 fps    

4- 31.5 grs  1,420 fps

5- 32 grs     1,491 fps      has an extractor rub from pressure.

The new primers worked this time.  All of the rounds ejected fine.   Looks like I need to stay in the low 1,400's.   Barnes says to use 32 grs of 4198 for 1,617 fps but I'm getting pressure signs above 31.5 grains and only getting 1,420 fps.  My load in this barrel tells me to stay around 31.5 grs of 4198.  I used an over the powder card and then toilet paper rolled into a tube long enough so the bullet pushed it down some against the card. 

Mike

What is the earliest dated revision of that blueprint drawing?

Bert

That bore specification blueprint is in the McCracken Library on-line digital archives for all the World to see (if you can find it)...

For M54/70 fans, this is an earlier table from 1930 that gives the specs on all the M54 chamberings including the 7.65 M/M and 9 M/M, along with all the other centerfire cartridges Winchester was making barrels for at the time.

Lou

Bill

That's a nice way to inform the masses on Zeb's question, on the rate of twist, for the .250-3000 caliber, as the factory blue prints you put up, help us to compare the barrel twists with several other calibers.

Very interesting.

Tony 

Chuck said
I have no experience with this caliber.  Have any of you tried a flat base bullet?  These have more sidewall to grab the rifling.  These helped me stabilize a couple of bullets. 
  

Chuck,  The prior experience I've had with the 250-3000 Savage cartridge is fairly long but narrow. I loaded, shot, and hunted with only one rifle so chambered but did so quite a lot.  My little full-stocked carbine had a 1-10 twist barrel, which would stabilize any .257 bullet from 60 grains all the way up to 120 grains, although the case ran short of powder capacity for anything over 100 grains, which I mostly used. I will say I did not load boattail bullets, as a rule. 

That rifle is the reason I question whether "overstabilization" is a phenomenon of any concern at the rotational velocities developed by practical sporting rifles. The most accurate bullet -- the one with which I shot the smallest subminute 100 yard groups from benchrest was a 75 grain varmint bullet. Yet 100 grain Silvertip factory ammunition would routinely stay between .85 and 1.15" when tested at 100 yards, as long as i did my part and didn't overheat the skinny little barrel. From a 6.5 pound carbine!  Maybe a difference could have been seen at 200+ yards. 

The 250 Savage, as popular as it was before the 243 WCF cancelled its ticket (and the 257 Roberts' ticket as well) was handicapped by the short, (e.g. 20") slow-twist barrels Savage put on several variations of the Model 99. Winchester adopted the twist along with the cartridge but put it in the Model 70, most of which had the 24" barrel necessary to get muzzle velocity to 3000 fs. I expect the carbines weren't shot at very long ranges, enough to draw complaints. 

Now that I have access to a 200 yard range, I suppose I could see what it took to destabilize bullets at that distance but ... this rifle isn't tapped for scopes. I've got a Marble tang on order, which should reach me the same day the rifle shows up. 

It must be my contrarian nature to deal with Forties and Fifties rifles, ammunition, and  issues that have long since been resolved by their modern counterparts -- Exhibit A could be the .25 Creedmore. However, in the course of trading a lot of rifles after hunting with them, I've killed Whitetailed deer with a 6mm Remington, 243 Winchester, 30 Winchester, 308, 30-06, 270, 280, 7mm magnum, and nothing killed them quicker than the 250 Savage. It had by far the mildest recoil and report and was easy to shoot accurately. That is why I'm drawn back to it. 

Louis Luttrell said

Zebulon said
Good morning, Bo. Thanks for the information.  Because the caliber in pre-64 Model 70s is hard to get, I've had no experience with it and assumed the 250 version had  a 1-10 twist, not 1-14. 

Hi Zeb-
Just for your reference, this 1938 blueprint shows the bore specs for Winchester's Models 54 and 70 in 250-3000 Savage.  One in 14" twist. They didn't change it before dropping the chambering in 1949...

Best,
Lou
  

How did I know you would be along with the Horse's Mouth chart?  You're a much better resource than Gemini because Gemini doesn't have all your stuff. Thanks, once again. 

Zebulon said
Good morning, Bo. Thanks for the information.  Because the caliber in pre-64 Model 70s is hard to get, I've had no experience with it and assumed the 250 version had  a 1-10 twist, not 1-14. 

Hi Zeb-

Just for your reference, this 1938 blueprint shows the bore specs for Winchester's Models 54 and 70 in 250-3000 Savage.  One in 14" twist. They didn't change it before dropping the chambering in 1949...

Best,

Lou