
November 7, 2015

Y’all purists better skip on to the next topic. Zeb and I had a score to settle with some paper at the club today and I had a rear sight disc that I needed to check out. As a result my 52C Target now was a larger rear aperture (5/64”) and my shooter 94 in 38-55 got a new aperture and the lowest Lyman 17 in my parts box. This 1894 (1904 vintage) had a poor quality metal refinish quite awhile back but it has a very nice bore and trigger. Good condition, just not original enough to interest any serious collector. It had a Lyman bead side securely glued in the front dovetail and it wears an older Marble sight on the rear tang. At this rate I may need some more rear sight discs!
Pics below, purists have been warned. This post is for aging shooters who aren’t afraid of accommodating their old eyes with a shooter-grade old Winchester.
Mike



November 7, 2015

I shot better with a much larger rear aperture and the Lyman bead sight. I had a spare rear aperture with a larger disc which along with the Lyman 17 front sight will give me a very similar sight picture to the one I have worked out on my Target 75. I saved the original discs, I had a few new spares in my parts box to open up. I just finished the alterations, a bit dark and stormy for test firing tonight. Patience, Grasshopper.
Mike
Will add pic of the large aperture in a few minutes from another device. It’s more suited to hunting but it told me what I needed to know.

November 7, 2015

Don-
A top view may be more helpful to the folks who can help.
Mike

November 7, 2015

Henry Mero said
I shoot better with a bigger target
Getting really close is important. Shooting these old guns helps with the memory, too. I’ve never gone downrange and forgotten why I went down there.
Mike

November 7, 2015

Bert H. said
OK… but you did not tell us if it (or you) shoot any better with it!
Bert-
Yes! Sighted it in today and things got pretty exciting. First shots were a bit low and then I tried to adjust the Marble tang sight like the four-clicks-to-an-inch Redfield and Lyman receiver sights. I corrected that oversight and then put five of the next six in a big, ragged hole @ 50 yards. No idea where that high flyer came from, better question is how did I get those five into that group? I ran out of ammo before I corrected the windage, Guess I should have given the new front sight one more whack when I installed it.
Mike

November 7, 2015

Thanks, guys. I’ve suspected this rifle liked that IMR 4198 load (yep, 40% rule seems to work for IMR 4198 as well, Bert!) but just couldn’t get my eyes to cooperate. This GC cast bullet is a bit heavy at around 283 grains but I have quite a few on the shelf so I’ll be confirming this group soon. The Marble tang sight had plenty of adjustment so I’m pretty tickled. I cast another somewhat lighter bullet for this cartridge and the mould drops two GC bullets and two PB. I size all of them to .381 and that causes some issues but I think I’ve worked them out.
Mike

November 7, 2015

Bert H. said
OK, that is an improvement… now to get it dialed into the bullseye
Just addressed that. The rear sight was getting within a few threads of left stop so I nudged the front sight a bit to the right. I think I may be getting the hang of this sight business! I think the time I spent reading and re-reading the sight chapter in JWA’s latest book has been a big help. I pulled that custom stocked 75 off the bottom of the safe, came up with a sight package that worked and applied some of that to this 1894. That Lyman globe sight looks a little odd on an 1894 but it’s a octagonal barrel so it doesn’t offend me too much. A purist may be offended but this old gun would never work for him anyway.
Mike

November 7, 2015

Thanks, Tim. Beautiful fall day today and I have brass prepped and ready to load. May even get some rimfire therapy in today. I wish I could say that flyer was before my last sight adjustment but it wasn’t.
Mike

March 31, 2009

TXGunNut said
Thanks, guys. I’ve suspected this rifle liked that IMR 4198 load (yep, 40% rule seems to work for IMR 4198 as well, Bert!) but just couldn’t get my eyes to cooperate. This GC cast bullet is a bit heavy at around 283 grains but I have quite a few on the shelf so I’ll be confirming this group soon. The Marble tang sight had plenty of adjustment so I’m pretty tickled. I cast another somewhat lighter bullet for this cartridge and the mould drops two GC bullets and two PB. I size all of them to .381 and that causes some issues but I think I’ve worked them out.
Mike
Your bullet weight is heavier than most, as you said. The data I have for a 265 gr. bullet says 20 grains of 4198 for 1470 fps. 40% = 22 grains.
I have data, using 35 grs of 3031, that shows 255 gr bullets going 1882 fps.
Heavier bullets usually require less powder to keep the pressure safe. The data I quote tries to replicate the original black powder loads. I wonder what your fps is? Whatever the pressure and speed is your barrel likes it.

November 7, 2015

Chuck said
TXGunNut said
Thanks, guys. I’ve suspected this rifle liked that IMR 4198 load (yep, 40% rule seems to work for IMR 4198 as well, Bert!) but just couldn’t get my eyes to cooperate. This GC cast bullet is a bit heavy at around 283 grains but I have quite a few on the shelf so I’ll be confirming this group soon. The Marble tang sight had plenty of adjustment so I’m pretty tickled. I cast another somewhat lighter bullet for this cartridge and the mould drops two GC bullets and two PB. I size all of them to .381 and that causes some issues but I think I’ve worked them out.
Mike
Your bullet weight is heavier than most, as you said. The data I have for a 265 gr. bullet says 20 grains of 4198 for 1470 fps. 40% = 22 grains.
I have data, using 35 grs of 3031, that shows 255 gr bullets going 1882 fps.
Heavier bullets usually require less powder to keep the pressure safe. The data I quote tries to replicate the original black powder loads. I wonder what your fps is? Whatever the pressure and speed is your barrel likes it.
Chuck-
My starting load for the 283 grain (379279) bullet was 21grs but the rifle seems to like 22. I have a Labradar and an ancient Chrony around here, at one time I had a pretty good idea what the velocity should be (1400-1500) but will check it out. I was confused in my earlier post, the mould for the heavy bullet drops two GC, two PB. One part of this project is trying to decide if a GC is necessary for this round. According to my notes the above group was with the PB variant but earlier groups were better with the GC variant. This new sight strategy will help me give a more accurate assessment. I don’t think a good-fitting bullet at less than 1500 fps generally needs a gas check but I’ve gotten some indications it will perform better with the gas check. Until I checked my notes today I thought the group above used the GC bullet. I write the load number on the case with a Sharpie after I load it and also write it on the target at the range. When more than a few days pass between loading bench and shooting bench it sometimes becomes a blind test. I’ll need to revisit the 3031 powder for this cartridge, tried it several years ago with lukewarm success, quite possibly because I wanted to keep the velocities down. That 35gr 3031 load is very close to my 375 Winchester (375449 clone & RL7) load, I don’t push my 38-55’s anywhere near that hard. I personally think that’s above my comfort zone with this cartridge in these rifles.
Mike
ETA: I loaded 20 each of the PB and GC 379279 bullets today with the 22gr load.
MH

March 31, 2009

Mike, I will have to dig out my 38-55 ammo and see what load I am shooting. Usually you would need more 3031 for the same FPS. Here is some 45-90 data before I got lazy and started testing 1 powder.
45-90 WCF | ||||
1 | 4759 | 24 | 1,510 | 300 grain bullet, Bertram brass. Have much more data. Factory 1,530 FPS. |
2 | 4198 | 31 | 1,540 | 300 grain bullet, Bertram brass. Have much more data. Factory 1,530 FPS. |
3 | 3031 | 43 | 1,548 | 300 grain bullet, Bertram brass. Have much more data. Factory 1,530 FPS. |

November 7, 2015

Chuck-
I’ve had some success with 3031 in other cartridges, as I recall it and RL7 perform well for me in the 30WCF, 32Spl and 35 Remington (and maybe a few others). In my experience it works best at a bit higher pressures in medium sized cases utilizing a bottleneck. The 45-90 is a Holy Black cartridge for me so I have very little experience with 3031 in that cartridge. IMHO smokeless powder makes no sense in a case that big. I’ve had some success with BP in the 38-55 but this project involves smokeless powder and velocities somewhat above what BP can deliver and less than what seems to be an optimal 3031 load. I don’t doubt 3031 will work in this cartridge but I think I want to work a little more with 4198 and maybe 5744 before trying 3031 again.
Mike
1 Guest(s)
