DCRA 7.62 Conversion Range Report
Printed From: Enfield-Rifles.com
Category: Enfields
Forum Name: 7.62 Enfield
Forum Description: All things to do with the 7.62 Enfield
URL: http://www.enfield-rifles.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=11112
Printed Date: March 26 2026 at 6:57pm
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.07 - https://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: DCRA 7.62 Conversion Range Report
Posted By: britrifles
Subject: DCRA 7.62 Conversion Range Report
Date Posted: August 03 2019 at 2:50pm
|
A few weeks back I loaded up some 7.62 NATO “Mexican Match” to test out my theory on why the No. 4 7.62 conversions did not shoot well. My theory was wrong. But I did discover something that I’ve not heard before as a possible cause or contributor. Here are the Loads: 1. Canadian Dominion Arsenal (DA) 1959 Ball (147 Hard Point Boat Tail) military Service issue 2. DA ‘59 above, with 150 gr SMK subbed for the 147 gr ball projectile. 3. DA ‘59 case, CCI #200 Primer, 42.0 gr Varget, pulled 147 gr DA ‘59 ball projectile from 2 above. 4. DA ‘62 case, WLR primer, 40.0 gr Varget, 168 gr SMK as a control (proven match load). I expected load 2 would be best of loads 1 thru 3. It was not. 2 x 10 shot groups of each load off the bench at 200 yards, PH 5C aperture sight. This is a UF56 Mk 2 action with CA 7.62 barrel, mid-band barrel bedded.  Here are the targets. Note there was some sight adjustments between groups as noted. Load #1 DA 59 Service Ball, Group 1 - 2.6 MOA extreme spread, not bad for service ammo.  Load # 1 DA 59 Service Ball, Group 2 - 6.0 MOA extreme spread, terrible. No idea why second group was so bad. Moved rear sight 1 MOA left before shooting this group.  Load # 2 150 gr SMK subbed in for Service bullet, Group 1 - 2.8 MOA, Fair result, expected better  Load #2 150 gr SMK subbed in for Service Bullet, Group 2 - 5.1 MOA, terrible, expected way better.  Load #3 42.0 gr Varget, 147 gr Pulled Service Bullet, Group 1 - 2.0 MOA much better than expected Note the shift in MPI, about +4 MOA from previous loads which all has the original factory powder charge.  Load #3 42.0 gr Varget, 147 gr Pulled Service Bullet, Group 2 - 2.1 MOA much better than expected. Adjusted rear sight 3 MOA down and 1 MOA left before shooting this group.  Load #4 40.0 gr Varget, 168 gr SMK Match Load Control Group. Note the 2 shots that were just outside the X ring (10.9) 1.7 MOA Extreme Spread. The group was 1.5 MOA for the first 9 shots.  Conclusions: Poor accuracy of 7.62 Service Ball Ammo was not related to bullet quality. The two 10 shot groups with pulled bullets loaded with 42 gr Varget grouped at approx 2 MOA extreme spread. 150 gr Match bullets loaded in place of the pulled bullet did only slightly better. When loading up these cartridges, I weighed the powder charges of 20 rounds and was surprised it ranged from 40 to 43 grains. The powder appeared similar in stick size to IMR 4895. I returned the individual charges back into the case they were dumped from, so load #2 with the 150 gr SMK evaluated the as charged service ammo with a modern match bullet. Variations in powder charge weights most likely was the cause of poor accuracy. I suspect the service ammunition may be loaded to a higher velocity than Load #3 (42 gr Varget), and the higher velocities/pressures may be flexing the action more than the .303 and giving erratic groups. I intend on doing two more tests: 1. Pull service bullets, dump powder into powder measure, recharge cases with 40.0 gr of service powder, reseat pulled service bullet. 2. 42.0 gr Varget with 150 gr SMK. |
Replies:
Posted By: britrifles
Date Posted: January 11 2021 at 4:59am
|
I may have posted this before, but likely lost in the “Enfield Rifles” forum. I shot this target last year, prone in sling, no support, PH 5C aperture sight. UF56 No. 4 Mk 2 DCRA (Canadian Arsenal Ltd, Long Branch 7.62 service weight barrel). Load: Dominion Arsenal (DA) 1962 7.62 NATO Case Neck Sized WLR Primer 40.0 gr Varget 168 gr Sierra MatchKing 2.80 inch OAL 200 Yards on NRA SR Target. Score is 100-8x. This is the most accurate Lee Enfield I have.  |
Posted By: Canuck
Date Posted: January 11 2021 at 6:52am
|
Very impressive! Thanks for sharing your results. ------------- Castles made of sand slip into the sea.....eventually |
Posted By: Sgtrick
Date Posted: January 11 2021 at 8:57am
|
Very nice target. Well done. Im just starting to work with my 7.62 longbranch, conversion number 54. I have a bunch of 1961 DA ball ammo that I want to try but am really interested in shooting powder coated cast bullets. Thanks for sharing this.
|
Posted By: britrifles
Date Posted: January 12 2021 at 4:54am
|
Sgtrick, i have DA 59, 60 and 62 ball ammo. I don’t think I have any 61. I’ve shot a few hundred rounds of this ammo, accuracy is 3 to 4 MOA, sometimes a bit better. I ran a test a few years back where I pulled the bullets on 40 rounds and re-metered the powder charge. These were all from the same lot of DA ‘60 ball ammo. I found that there was a vary large variation in the powder charge weight (as much as 2 grains) which was causing vertical stringing of the groups. With a consistent powder charge (+/- 0.1 gr), the groups tightened right up. I had first suspected poor quality bullets, but that was not the reason for the mediocre accuracy of the service ammo. I posted the results of this test on the Enfield Rifles or Reloading forum (can’t remember which). I’ll see if I can find that post and ask our administrator to move it over to the 7.62 Enfield forum. I’ve not tried cast bullets yet in any of my Enfields. What is very appealing with shooting cast is that it is very easy on the action and barrel. The much lower pressures and much less erosion of the throat and wear of the bore. I suspect the barrel life with shooting cast is in the tens of thousands of rounds. |
Posted By: Pukka Bundook
Date Posted: January 12 2021 at 5:26am
|
Very good info to have on those powder variations Geoff. I would not have expected such a wide spread! That is a Very pretty target! BTW, I haven't noticed Englishman.ca posting; Is he OK do you blokes know? Maybe I just missed seeing his posts...
|
Posted By: Shamu
Date Posted: January 12 2021 at 6:30am
|
He's not listed as being logged on since August of last year! Does anyone have a direct contact with him? ------------- Don't shoot till you see the whites of their thighs. (Unofficial motto of the Royal Air Force) |
Posted By: Pukka Bundook
Date Posted: January 12 2021 at 7:29am
| Just sent him an email, Sham. |
Posted By: Shamu
Date Posted: January 12 2021 at 8:29am
|
Thanks. ------------- Don't shoot till you see the whites of their thighs. (Unofficial motto of the Royal Air Force) |
Posted By: Sgtrick
Date Posted: January 12 2021 at 9:50am
|
Britrifles. I pulled the bullets on a couple of 1961 DA rnds to what powder was used. The charge was about 42 gns of what appears to be 4895. I plan on loading some 4895 loads and crono them and compare with the military loads. I might do what you did and pull bunch and weight the charges. Been shooting powder coated bullets in my 303s for a few years now for the reasons you mentioned. Easier on these fine old rifles.
|
Posted By: britrifles
Date Posted: January 12 2021 at 1:05pm
|
Thanks Richard. I totally pulled that last shot off to the left, I knew I had done that when the shot broke. Kinda ruined the target. I was proud of how tight the elevation spread was (1/2 MOA), the barrel just sings with this load. One of these days, I’m going to go into serious prone shooting mode with the DCRA conversion and see if I can break the 100-10x barrier that seems to have eluded me so far. I’ve done it off the bench, but to me, that “doesn’t count”.
I hope Englishman is OK. We have not heard from him in a while. |
Posted By: A square 10
Date Posted: January 12 2021 at 7:27pm
| me too , i had not realized how long it has been , hate when this happens |
Posted By: Pukka Bundook
Date Posted: January 12 2021 at 9:42pm
|
Gents, My email to Simon, (Englishman) came back undeliverable. Must be a year since we wrote... Maybe he has changed his email? Anyone have a newer one for him?
|
Posted By: Goosic
Date Posted: January 13 2021 at 2:13am
| . |
Posted By: Shamu
Date Posted: January 13 2021 at 6:58am
|
Sorry, no. All my contacts are through the forum here. I have access to an IP checker & his "box" still seems to be active at the same location as when he registered.
------------- Don't shoot till you see the whites of their thighs. (Unofficial motto of the Royal Air Force) |
Posted By: A square 10
Date Posted: January 13 2021 at 10:11am
this happened to me back about 15 years ago - i knew him in a previous life , pre- this enfield site , might be having issues with his computer/service , hopefully we will regain contact ,
|
Pukka Bundook wrote:Posted By: rufrdr
Date Posted: February 18 2021 at 12:10pm
|
When I was on active duty an NCO in my small arms shop told me that the AMU recommended breaking the sealant on 7.62mm ball rounds by seating the bullet until you felt/heard it give, usually just a hair's breadth of movement. The intent was to give uniform release of the bullet, round to round. |
Posted By: britrifles
Date Posted: February 19 2021 at 3:01am
| Yes, particularly for match ammunition. I don’t recall if I did this in the tests I ran for this post. Cases are crimped into the bullet for ball ammo and that tar really takes a set. |
Posted By: 450 Fuller
Date Posted: June 08 2022 at 2:20pm
|
BritR- Interesting but valuable comment about using cast lead bullets in our Enfields. I have used them in my 7.62 as I had a supply of 168 gr GC versions. There is however, a potential gas check problem that I personally experienced in another rifle, a custom pre-64 Model 70 Winchester in 338-06. This appears to be a problem almost unique to bottleneck cartridges like the 7.62 or parent 30-06 cases. If, for ANY reason the GC releases from the bullet base during or after the bullet seating process, it either falls on top of the powder or sticks lower in the neck area. Either condition results in a spike in pressure. The gas check acts as an obstruction: bad things can and will happen. A Model 70 action is a bit stronger than a SMLE, in my judgment-and the Enfield may not weather the extra pressure well. I was lucky, but no longer use any cast lead bullets in any of my Model 70 sniper or hunting rifles. I still use them regularly in my 1886 and Model 71s, but they are 45-70s or other almost straight wall cases like the 450 Alaskan. This is an older but valuable thread. Trying to catch up through other's experiences. ------------- Only the dead have seen the end of war-Plato Socialism-The equal sharing of misery-Churchill MACVSOG-5th Special Forces Gp |
Posted By: britrifles
Date Posted: June 09 2022 at 3:10pm
|
450 Fuller, I’ve yet to try cast in my LE’s. I’ve shot a lot of cast in my Dad’s .577-.450 Martini Henry, no gas checks. My Dad did some cast bullet shooting in his No. 4 rifles, with gas checks, and many others have too. Shooting gas checked bullets in bottleneck cases has been done for many years, perhaps more than 60? This issue is new to me, but I can imagine that a gas check coming off of a bullet in the case is probably not good. I think it is possible to get fine accuracy with cast. Something I’ll work on once my supply of jacketed bullets is exhausted or gets too expensive to replace (which is quickly approaching!). |
Posted By: Strangely Brown
Date Posted: June 10 2022 at 2:58am
Nearly 20 years a large quantity of .303 South African surplus came into the UK and was almost immediately labeled as rubbish by some users; on close inspection the ammunition was heavily varnished due I suspect to the climatic conditions in SA. The above trick by breaking the varnish coating turned "rubbish" ammunition into a similar quality to that of HXP, albeit not reloadable brass. The footnote to this is a friend (now passed) who purchased 1100 rounds and gave half of it away to the youngsters in his club to use as plinking ammunition before discovering the trick. ------------- Mick |
Posted By: britrifles
Date Posted: June 10 2022 at 3:58am
|
Recalling my accuracy tests on the Canadian 7.62 Ball ammunition, I don’t think the bullet sealant was the cause of poor accuracy. One of the Loads I tested (Load 2 in the OP) was substituting a 150 gr Sierra MatchKing for the 147 gr service bullet, retaining the original powder charge. Accuracy was poor. For this ammunition, it was the very inconsistent powder charges that gave the vertical stringing. I’ve know about the trick of breaking the bullet seal in a bullet seating die, and I may have done this on the first two groups I called Load 1, the as issued 7.62 Ball ammunition.
|