Model 30 Express 25 Rem
-
Rickster
Re: Model 30 Express 25 Rem
Great to hear from one who has been loading the 25 Rem for so long. I am also a big fan of the old Rem pump guns. I have several, but alas, none in 25 Rem.
I recently picked up a Mo 30 in 25 Rem, and have brass and dies on order. I have been looking at 25-35 data and thinking it is a bit mild for the Mo 30. And I see no reason the case shouldnt be able to take modern pressures. As usual, I plan to test the upper end on this one, if for no other reason than to see what it will (safely) do. In general though, I prefer moderate loads, long ago realizing that a few extra feet per second isnt worth the wear and tear. Especially when the brass is hard to come by. (But then, I have only been handloading for 25 years)
Your comment on Varget is interesting. I have tried it for other calibers, and been impressed with the consistent velocities it provides. But it has never given optimum accuracy, so I have yet to burn a full pound of it.
I keep going back to the old IMR series for my working loads. The Powley Computer is recommending 3031 for 100gr and 4895 for 117. But experience trumps theory. And the PC is based on higher pressure loads than are standard for the 25 Rem/25-35. I can imagine that a slightly reduced load of 3031 would make an efficient moderate pressure load.
The twist in my rifle is approximately one in 12. Is that about what you are seeing in your other 25 Rems?
I recently picked up a Mo 30 in 25 Rem, and have brass and dies on order. I have been looking at 25-35 data and thinking it is a bit mild for the Mo 30. And I see no reason the case shouldnt be able to take modern pressures. As usual, I plan to test the upper end on this one, if for no other reason than to see what it will (safely) do. In general though, I prefer moderate loads, long ago realizing that a few extra feet per second isnt worth the wear and tear. Especially when the brass is hard to come by. (But then, I have only been handloading for 25 years)
Your comment on Varget is interesting. I have tried it for other calibers, and been impressed with the consistent velocities it provides. But it has never given optimum accuracy, so I have yet to burn a full pound of it.
I keep going back to the old IMR series for my working loads. The Powley Computer is recommending 3031 for 100gr and 4895 for 117. But experience trumps theory. And the PC is based on higher pressure loads than are standard for the 25 Rem/25-35. I can imagine that a slightly reduced load of 3031 would make an efficient moderate pressure load.
The twist in my rifle is approximately one in 12. Is that about what you are seeing in your other 25 Rems?
-
Rickster
Re: Model 30 Express 25 Rem
I could believe 10". My estimate was done with a cleaning swab. Not very precise. Thanks for the info.
Aw nutz. I should have asked sooner, because Jamison brass is what I have coming from Buffalo arms. I could have gotten reformed 30 Rem, but wanted the 25 Rem headstamp. I do have a lathe, so I can save them if they wont work through the 30. Here is hoping it is more tolerant. I know the Remington pumps are particular about head.
I know what you mean about the small differences in velocity between IMR 3031 and 4895. http://www.imrpowder.com/pdf/IMR_rifle.pdf shows how similar they are (for everything except 25 Rem/25-35, of course). I run 3031 for 150gr loads in the 30 Rem and 30-30. I cant remember what I loaded in my 250, as it is mainly a safe queen. I am definitely interested in the old Ideal reloading data. I'll send you a PM.
Aw nutz. I should have asked sooner, because Jamison brass is what I have coming from Buffalo arms. I could have gotten reformed 30 Rem, but wanted the 25 Rem headstamp. I do have a lathe, so I can save them if they wont work through the 30. Here is hoping it is more tolerant. I know the Remington pumps are particular about head.
I know what you mean about the small differences in velocity between IMR 3031 and 4895. http://www.imrpowder.com/pdf/IMR_rifle.pdf shows how similar they are (for everything except 25 Rem/25-35, of course). I run 3031 for 150gr loads in the 30 Rem and 30-30. I cant remember what I loaded in my 250, as it is mainly a safe queen. I am definitely interested in the old Ideal reloading data. I'll send you a PM.
-
Rickster
Re: Model 30 Express 25 Rem
My 25 Rem reloading components arrived last week, and I had a chance to do some experimenting this weekend. There looks to be a shortage of information on this rifle/cartridge combination, so I thought I would take the time to pass on a few of my notes.
I bought 100 cases of Jamison brass and a set of Hornady dies from Buffalo arms. A guy from BA called to let me know that the order would be delayed a few weeks because they didn’t have the dies in stock (even though listed on their website). While on the phone I asked him about the brass. He said BA has two types. The Jamison brass is the one with JAM in the part number. The other is neck sized from Remington manufactured 30 Rem brass. He didn’t mention any problems with the Jam brass, and at that time I didn’t know to ask. But, as it turns out, the brass does indeed have the problem described by tbury in an earlier post. That is, the extractor groove isn’t cut deep enough. The BA listed price for the Jam brass was $34, but they billed me $50. I wont be doing business with BA again.
The extractor hook bears on the bottom of the extractor groove. This causes two problems. First, it causes the extractor to be held outward slightly away from the bolt. This could be a problem if a case sticks in the chamber. The Mo. 30 extractor is retained by a groove cut near the bolt face. A tooth on the extractor fits in this groove. With the case holding the extractor out, the tooth isn’t fully seated in the groove. I suspect that if a case were to require a lot of extraction force, the tooth might jump out of the groove. But I haven’t had that problem yet. Second, the extractor pushes the case against the opposite side of the chamber, slightly canting the case out of alignment with the bore axis. This is not conducive to good accuracy. I checked my 30 rem brass. It doesn’t have the same problem. After my preliminary testing, I will switch to resized 30 Rem brass. I might turn down the extractor grooves in the Jam brass, if I get time.
The new brass had about 60 thousands of headspace to my rifle chamber. That is quite a lot (nearly 1/16 of an inch). So I limited the first loads to moderate pressures to fire form the cases to the chamber.
25 Rem and 25-35 reloading data are supposedly interchangeable, according to the manuals. Additional 25-35 data is readily available, thanks to the guys on the lever action boards. But I discovered that the Jam brass holds more powder than the 25-35. A standard 25-35 load in this brass leaves about 10 grains of free space. Loads for the 25-35 are typically in the vicinity of 27 grains, with 30 to 32 grains being a compressed load. But the 25 Rem Jam brass will hold 36 to 37 grains when filled to the bottom of the neck (even before fireforming). I have yet to check the capacity of necked down 30 Rem brass, but I suspect it will be similar since 30 Rem also holds about 36 gr to the neck.
My reload testing results are still preliminary, but I will say that in order to fill the case without creating excess pressure, I found that slower powder, such as 4350, worked better than the powders recommended for the 25-35. Top loads came close to those for the 250 Savage. 3000fps with 75 and 87 grain bullets was obtainable. I had to stop my testing there though. I was using bulk Remington 86 grain 25-20 bullets for some of my testing (to save money). I found that upon reaching 3000fps, the 25-20 bullets break up. I discovered this when I found that my chronograph LCD readout doesn’t work after being hit by a bullet fragment.
The chamber appears to be throated for round nose bullets, but I had no trouble reaching the lands with 75gr pointed bullets. I found that Hornady 75 and 87gr pointed bullets seated to an OAL of 2.60 inch placed the bullet near the lands. The Mo. 30 magazine length, being capable of holding a 30-06, does not limit the use of long pointed bullets (such as ballistic tips), seated as far out as necessary. And the extra magazine space didn’t cause any feeding problems.
The rifle appears to have been sighted for factory loads (tame), and shot 6 to 12 inches high with high speed 75 and 87 gr bullets. The peep sight was already bottomed out, so I could not adjust for the 75gr and 87gr loads. I had planned to set this rifle up for 75gr and 87gr pointed bullets at or near top velocities, since I already have plenty of deer rifles. I don’t want to drill and tap the receiver or change the front sight of this fine old gentleman, so I think I will relieve the underside of the peep sight where it contacts the receiver. I probably wont be able to get the peep down enough for 75gr bullets, so I will probably do the best I can and then develop a 87 or 100gr load that matches.
Under the circumstances, I didn’t waste a lot of time doing accuracy tests. The shots I did put on paper indicate that 3MOA was the norm for the 25-35 loads. Heavier loads, that filled the case, yielded groups in the 1-2 MOA range, which is as good as I can shoot with iron sights.
I bought 100 cases of Jamison brass and a set of Hornady dies from Buffalo arms. A guy from BA called to let me know that the order would be delayed a few weeks because they didn’t have the dies in stock (even though listed on their website). While on the phone I asked him about the brass. He said BA has two types. The Jamison brass is the one with JAM in the part number. The other is neck sized from Remington manufactured 30 Rem brass. He didn’t mention any problems with the Jam brass, and at that time I didn’t know to ask. But, as it turns out, the brass does indeed have the problem described by tbury in an earlier post. That is, the extractor groove isn’t cut deep enough. The BA listed price for the Jam brass was $34, but they billed me $50. I wont be doing business with BA again.
The extractor hook bears on the bottom of the extractor groove. This causes two problems. First, it causes the extractor to be held outward slightly away from the bolt. This could be a problem if a case sticks in the chamber. The Mo. 30 extractor is retained by a groove cut near the bolt face. A tooth on the extractor fits in this groove. With the case holding the extractor out, the tooth isn’t fully seated in the groove. I suspect that if a case were to require a lot of extraction force, the tooth might jump out of the groove. But I haven’t had that problem yet. Second, the extractor pushes the case against the opposite side of the chamber, slightly canting the case out of alignment with the bore axis. This is not conducive to good accuracy. I checked my 30 rem brass. It doesn’t have the same problem. After my preliminary testing, I will switch to resized 30 Rem brass. I might turn down the extractor grooves in the Jam brass, if I get time.
The new brass had about 60 thousands of headspace to my rifle chamber. That is quite a lot (nearly 1/16 of an inch). So I limited the first loads to moderate pressures to fire form the cases to the chamber.
25 Rem and 25-35 reloading data are supposedly interchangeable, according to the manuals. Additional 25-35 data is readily available, thanks to the guys on the lever action boards. But I discovered that the Jam brass holds more powder than the 25-35. A standard 25-35 load in this brass leaves about 10 grains of free space. Loads for the 25-35 are typically in the vicinity of 27 grains, with 30 to 32 grains being a compressed load. But the 25 Rem Jam brass will hold 36 to 37 grains when filled to the bottom of the neck (even before fireforming). I have yet to check the capacity of necked down 30 Rem brass, but I suspect it will be similar since 30 Rem also holds about 36 gr to the neck.
My reload testing results are still preliminary, but I will say that in order to fill the case without creating excess pressure, I found that slower powder, such as 4350, worked better than the powders recommended for the 25-35. Top loads came close to those for the 250 Savage. 3000fps with 75 and 87 grain bullets was obtainable. I had to stop my testing there though. I was using bulk Remington 86 grain 25-20 bullets for some of my testing (to save money). I found that upon reaching 3000fps, the 25-20 bullets break up. I discovered this when I found that my chronograph LCD readout doesn’t work after being hit by a bullet fragment.
The chamber appears to be throated for round nose bullets, but I had no trouble reaching the lands with 75gr pointed bullets. I found that Hornady 75 and 87gr pointed bullets seated to an OAL of 2.60 inch placed the bullet near the lands. The Mo. 30 magazine length, being capable of holding a 30-06, does not limit the use of long pointed bullets (such as ballistic tips), seated as far out as necessary. And the extra magazine space didn’t cause any feeding problems.
The rifle appears to have been sighted for factory loads (tame), and shot 6 to 12 inches high with high speed 75 and 87 gr bullets. The peep sight was already bottomed out, so I could not adjust for the 75gr and 87gr loads. I had planned to set this rifle up for 75gr and 87gr pointed bullets at or near top velocities, since I already have plenty of deer rifles. I don’t want to drill and tap the receiver or change the front sight of this fine old gentleman, so I think I will relieve the underside of the peep sight where it contacts the receiver. I probably wont be able to get the peep down enough for 75gr bullets, so I will probably do the best I can and then develop a 87 or 100gr load that matches.
Under the circumstances, I didn’t waste a lot of time doing accuracy tests. The shots I did put on paper indicate that 3MOA was the norm for the 25-35 loads. Heavier loads, that filled the case, yielded groups in the 1-2 MOA range, which is as good as I can shoot with iron sights.
Last edited by Rickster on Tue Jun 17, 2008 6:07 pm, edited 3 times in total.
-
Rickster
Re: Model 30 Express 25 Rem
Thanks for the feedback guys. Here is my next installment.
I gave up on the Jamison cases when 2 separated during resizing, after only 2 firings. I have reloaded tens of thousands of rounds over the years, and this is the first time I have had this problem. So I chucked the Jamison cases and necked down some 30 Remington cases instead. The Rems are on their 6th firing with no problems so far.
Once the cases have been fully fireformed, and full length resized in Hornady dies, the headspace to the Mo. 30 chamber is 5 thousands, which is just about right. Case capacity on these cases is 44 grains of water, which is 1 or 2 grains less than the 250-3000 (note, I got the 250-3000 case volume figure off the internet and have not double checked it).
And, as luck would have it, I recently picked up a Ruger No. 3 that had been rebarreled to 25 Rem (of all things). It is a heavy barrel and well suited to accuracy testing. So, to keep wear and tear off the Mo. 30, and allow the use of a scope for accuracy testing, most testing has shifted to the Ruger, and then occasionally checked with the Remington.
The Ruger chamber is tighter than the Remington. The chamber neck diameter on the Remington is 4 thousands larger (looser) than the Ruger. The Ruger has no headspace. As noted above, the Remington has 5 thousands headspace. For a given powder load, the Ruger generally developed higher pressures, and correspondingly higher velocities (100 to 200fps) than the Remington. As a result, any load developed for the Ruger was safe in the Remington. My plan is to work up near maximum loads for the Ruger and then use the same loads in either rifle. This means that the Remington will be running a little underpowered. For example, the best load tested used H4895 to develop 3050fps with 87gr bullets. The same load in the Rem gave 2850fps.
My goal has been to work up loads that reach 100% loading density at the same time that pressure becomes limiting. Since I don’t have a pressure barrel, I relied on velocities, primer appearance and case head expansion to tell me if I had gone too far. Based on initial test runs, and the Powley computer, my velocity goals were: 75gr- 3200fps, 87gr - 3000fps, 100gr - 2800fps, 120gr - 2500fps. For the purposes of finding the max, I tested to 100fps beyond those goals, provided that I wasn’t already getting signs of excessive pressure. I have ruined 3 cases so far (loose primer pockets).
I have intentionally not reported loads in terms of powder weight (grains). I am not trying to provide a reloading manual for public consumption. I am merely trying to give an idea of which powder worked best for me.
I tried IMR3031, IMR4046, IMR4320, IMR4350; H4198, H4895, H322, H380, HBLC-2, H335, Varget, RL7, RL10X RL15; AA2230 and AA2520 for use with 75gr, 87gr, 100gr and 120gr pointed Hornady bullets. Below is a list summarizing my notes so far.
3031 is the best powder tested for the 75gr. 100% load density, or slightly compressed, gives 3200fps and excellent accuracy.
H4895 is the best powder tested for the 87gr bullet. 95% load density gives 3000fps and the best accuracy of any load with any powder. This was a late discovery. I still need to try H4895 with 75gr bullets. It is probably too fast for 100gr bullets.
10X also works well with 75gr bullets. It is slightly more dense than 3031, and can be loaded to higher velocities and pressure. Would be good for hunting loads where power is more important than case life. Meters better than 3031.
IMR 4064 is the best powder tested for the 100gr bullet. 100% load density, or slightly compressed, gives 2800fps and excellent accuracy.
RL 15 also works well with 100gr bullets. It is slightly more dense than 4064, and can be loaded to higher velocities and pressure. Would be good for hunting loads where power is more important than case life. Meters better than 4064.
IMR 4320 was mediocre on all counts. I have yet to find a cartridge that really likes 4320. That is why I am still trying to burn the original 2 lbs of it I bought 15 years ago. Maybe it is just me.
Varget was not outstanding with any bullet in initial testing.
Ball powders H380, AA 2520, BLC-2 and H335 heated the barrel quickly, very quickly. Testing found loads that were workable, but I quickly decided to stop using them for the MO 30. The old barrel alloys did not use as much chromium as do newer alloys. This makes the older barrels more prone to erosion. There are so few of these Mo 30 25 Rem barrels remaining, it only seems right to be gentle with it.
4350 seems well suited to the 120gr bullet, but my testing was limited.
AA 2230, H322, H4198 and RL7 are too fast for any bullet (OK maybe not the 60gr, but I didnt try those.) These are the powders that wasted 3 cases.
I gave up on the Jamison cases when 2 separated during resizing, after only 2 firings. I have reloaded tens of thousands of rounds over the years, and this is the first time I have had this problem. So I chucked the Jamison cases and necked down some 30 Remington cases instead. The Rems are on their 6th firing with no problems so far.
Once the cases have been fully fireformed, and full length resized in Hornady dies, the headspace to the Mo. 30 chamber is 5 thousands, which is just about right. Case capacity on these cases is 44 grains of water, which is 1 or 2 grains less than the 250-3000 (note, I got the 250-3000 case volume figure off the internet and have not double checked it).
And, as luck would have it, I recently picked up a Ruger No. 3 that had been rebarreled to 25 Rem (of all things). It is a heavy barrel and well suited to accuracy testing. So, to keep wear and tear off the Mo. 30, and allow the use of a scope for accuracy testing, most testing has shifted to the Ruger, and then occasionally checked with the Remington.
The Ruger chamber is tighter than the Remington. The chamber neck diameter on the Remington is 4 thousands larger (looser) than the Ruger. The Ruger has no headspace. As noted above, the Remington has 5 thousands headspace. For a given powder load, the Ruger generally developed higher pressures, and correspondingly higher velocities (100 to 200fps) than the Remington. As a result, any load developed for the Ruger was safe in the Remington. My plan is to work up near maximum loads for the Ruger and then use the same loads in either rifle. This means that the Remington will be running a little underpowered. For example, the best load tested used H4895 to develop 3050fps with 87gr bullets. The same load in the Rem gave 2850fps.
My goal has been to work up loads that reach 100% loading density at the same time that pressure becomes limiting. Since I don’t have a pressure barrel, I relied on velocities, primer appearance and case head expansion to tell me if I had gone too far. Based on initial test runs, and the Powley computer, my velocity goals were: 75gr- 3200fps, 87gr - 3000fps, 100gr - 2800fps, 120gr - 2500fps. For the purposes of finding the max, I tested to 100fps beyond those goals, provided that I wasn’t already getting signs of excessive pressure. I have ruined 3 cases so far (loose primer pockets).
I have intentionally not reported loads in terms of powder weight (grains). I am not trying to provide a reloading manual for public consumption. I am merely trying to give an idea of which powder worked best for me.
I tried IMR3031, IMR4046, IMR4320, IMR4350; H4198, H4895, H322, H380, HBLC-2, H335, Varget, RL7, RL10X RL15; AA2230 and AA2520 for use with 75gr, 87gr, 100gr and 120gr pointed Hornady bullets. Below is a list summarizing my notes so far.
3031 is the best powder tested for the 75gr. 100% load density, or slightly compressed, gives 3200fps and excellent accuracy.
H4895 is the best powder tested for the 87gr bullet. 95% load density gives 3000fps and the best accuracy of any load with any powder. This was a late discovery. I still need to try H4895 with 75gr bullets. It is probably too fast for 100gr bullets.
10X also works well with 75gr bullets. It is slightly more dense than 3031, and can be loaded to higher velocities and pressure. Would be good for hunting loads where power is more important than case life. Meters better than 3031.
IMR 4064 is the best powder tested for the 100gr bullet. 100% load density, or slightly compressed, gives 2800fps and excellent accuracy.
RL 15 also works well with 100gr bullets. It is slightly more dense than 4064, and can be loaded to higher velocities and pressure. Would be good for hunting loads where power is more important than case life. Meters better than 4064.
IMR 4320 was mediocre on all counts. I have yet to find a cartridge that really likes 4320. That is why I am still trying to burn the original 2 lbs of it I bought 15 years ago. Maybe it is just me.
Varget was not outstanding with any bullet in initial testing.
Ball powders H380, AA 2520, BLC-2 and H335 heated the barrel quickly, very quickly. Testing found loads that were workable, but I quickly decided to stop using them for the MO 30. The old barrel alloys did not use as much chromium as do newer alloys. This makes the older barrels more prone to erosion. There are so few of these Mo 30 25 Rem barrels remaining, it only seems right to be gentle with it.
4350 seems well suited to the 120gr bullet, but my testing was limited.
AA 2230, H322, H4198 and RL7 are too fast for any bullet (OK maybe not the 60gr, but I didnt try those.) These are the powders that wasted 3 cases.
-
Rickster
Re: Model 30 Express 25 Rem
Hey Noel, I guess I missed something. Do you also have a Mo 30 or is your 25 Rem in a different bolt gun? I am thinking it would be sweet in a Sako medium action (if you have easy money) or in the Savage 340 (if you are frugal).
Regarding barrel heating. My Mo 30 has a lightweight barrel, tapering quickly and thin at the muzzle. 2 shots of ball powder and the barrel is too hot to touch. But with the IMR powders, as long as I kept my shooting slow (load one, shoot one, load another, shoot another) I could shoot almost indefinitely without it overheating.
You bring up something I have been curious about. I have been wondering which rifle is responsible for keeping the pressures down on the Rem cartridge series. I guessed the Mo 8, because the 14 seems as strong as any lever gun. But then, I havent had the chance to examine the workings of a Mo 8.
Yeah, you know it is a shame that the 25 Rem didn’t survive as a general purpose cartridge. It is such a nicely balanced cartridge. And looks modern too. Things would have been a whole lot different (and better) for all, if they had chosen the 25 Rem for the M16 instead of the 223. sigh
Regarding barrel heating. My Mo 30 has a lightweight barrel, tapering quickly and thin at the muzzle. 2 shots of ball powder and the barrel is too hot to touch. But with the IMR powders, as long as I kept my shooting slow (load one, shoot one, load another, shoot another) I could shoot almost indefinitely without it overheating.
You bring up something I have been curious about. I have been wondering which rifle is responsible for keeping the pressures down on the Rem cartridge series. I guessed the Mo 8, because the 14 seems as strong as any lever gun. But then, I havent had the chance to examine the workings of a Mo 8.
Yeah, you know it is a shame that the 25 Rem didn’t survive as a general purpose cartridge. It is such a nicely balanced cartridge. And looks modern too. Things would have been a whole lot different (and better) for all, if they had chosen the 25 Rem for the M16 instead of the 223. sigh
-
Rickster
Re: Model 30 Express 25 Rem
I enjoyed that a lot, Noel. Those are some real interesting pictures. You are lucky to have them. Oh, yeah, the rifles and the backdrop are nice too.
I hope it is OK to say on a Remington board, but I would like to have a 250 Super Sporter. I have Sporters in 25-20 and 32-20. They are sweet shooters.
How'd that newspaper add turn out? Mo 25s are my favorite carry gun by far. Cant get enough of those.
I hope it is OK to say on a Remington board, but I would like to have a 250 Super Sporter. I have Sporters in 25-20 and 32-20. They are sweet shooters.
How'd that newspaper add turn out? Mo 25s are my favorite carry gun by far. Cant get enough of those.
-
Rickster
Re: Model 30 Express 25 Rem
Thats a good one. Mine have the Schnable (sp?) tip and the old style mags. They are great shooters. A peep sight and a small Lyman globe front sight help bring out their accuracy. Unable to get the right peep for my 25-20, I adapted one designed for an 03 Springfield.
I have put thousands of rounds through my 32-20 sporter and have tested almost every concievable powder and bullet combo. It is a very flexible cartridge. You can safely run it up over 2000fps, but I have settled on loads in the 1400 to 1500 range as my favorite.
Lots of bullet choices, The pistol bullets and 30 Carbine rifle bullets give great accuracy. The plated soft lead ones are a good choice for 1400 to 1500. Hard cast and the Hornady swaged give cheap plinking. The little 60gr pistol bullets are explosive (and can be driven to 2800fps).
Anyway, feel free to drop me a line (EM or PM) when you get your prize.
Oh, The older ones had oversized firing pin holes (dont know why). So rifle primers are required to keep the primer from flowing back into the hole (even on light loads). Dont know about the newer ones.
I have put thousands of rounds through my 32-20 sporter and have tested almost every concievable powder and bullet combo. It is a very flexible cartridge. You can safely run it up over 2000fps, but I have settled on loads in the 1400 to 1500 range as my favorite.
Lots of bullet choices, The pistol bullets and 30 Carbine rifle bullets give great accuracy. The plated soft lead ones are a good choice for 1400 to 1500. Hard cast and the Hornady swaged give cheap plinking. The little 60gr pistol bullets are explosive (and can be driven to 2800fps).
Anyway, feel free to drop me a line (EM or PM) when you get your prize.
Oh, The older ones had oversized firing pin holes (dont know why). So rifle primers are required to keep the primer from flowing back into the hole (even on light loads). Dont know about the newer ones.
-
Rickster
Re: Model 30 Express 25 Rem
This thread has been updated here http://www.remingtonsociety.com/forums/ ... 146#p13146