Range Report: Old eyes, New Glasses, 25-20 levergun (photos)

KirkD · Post by **KirkD** » Mon Jan 28, 2008 3:36 pm

Last week I got some new glasses. I'm 53 years old and normally wear graduated lenses, but when shooting, that sweet spot through my lens can be a real pain to find with every shot. For this reason, my new glasses are single focal length. I was eager to try out the glasses and managed to make it to the range today to see how they would do.

I took my Winchester Model 53 .25-20 (made in 1924 according to the polishing room records) and two different loads. Sights were the factory iron sights.

Load #1: 5 grains of Unique under a 74 grain Lyman 257420 gas check for 1,587 fps
Load #2: 9.3 grains of IMR 4198 under a 60 grain Hornady JFP for 1,192 fps

To start with, I took five shots at a target 100 yards away. I was sitting at a bench, holding my rifle, but resting my left wrist on a block of wood and my right elbow on the bench. I used Load #1. Here are the results ...

Well, I'll take responsibility for that loose group, although this is the first time I've tried this load at 100 yards. I then put up a new target and sent 5 more rounds downrange, again, at 100 yards and still with load #1. Four shots were nice and tight, but then there was that durn flyer. Here are the results of this second group of five shots ....

Well, four of them weren't too bad, but I'm not sure about that flyer. I'll need to shoot this load more times to see if it is me, or the load, however, I wanted to try some shooting offhand at 50 yards. This is going to be my main Woodchuck gun and all shots are taken offhand at ranges of 50 yards or less. I set up my first target at 50 yards and squeezed off 5 shots. I went down and took a look .... not too pretty. This first group are the ones not circled in the photo ... three were fine, but then there was the two wild flyers ... I think it was me. I haven't done any offhand shooting since winter set in almost 3 months ago and it's obvious I'm out of practice. I went back to the line and fired off my remaining 6 rounds of load number one. Five of the shots are not so bad with this second set of 6 shots but then there is that flyer way out in right field. This second group of shots are circled in red. Here's the results .....

I then set up a fresh target at 50 yards and tried load #2, shooting offhand. I only had four rounds left of this load and I wanted to use it up, as I'm now using the Lyman bullet exclusively. This group of 4 was a little better, but I wouldn't necessarily put it down to the load or bullet .... I was concentrating a bit more on these shots, as I had with the second round of shots with load #1. Here are the results .....

I need to load up another 50 rounds and start practicing my offhand shooting. I also want to try out some 100 yard shooting, resting my hand on a block like this time, to figure out if the flyers are me or the load. If they are the load, I might have to increase the velocity slightly to seal off the bore a bit better and see if that takes care of the flyers. By the way, the new glasses aren't a magic potion, but they do make it a lot easier and faster to acquire the target.

This load #1 is a bit faster than the original 25-20 load of an 86 grain bullet at 1,375 fps, but not as fast as Winchesters H.V. load for the Model 92 of a 86 grains bullet at 1,730 fps, or the 'Super Speed' load with a 60 grain bullet at 2,200 fps. I didn't take the time to take a new photo of the rifle I used, so here's the same one I've posted before ....

Nath · Post by **Nath** » Mon Jan 28, 2008 4:31 pm

Thats a great report, I expect no less from you Sir

The shooter (you) is very good bearing in mind the open sights.
Say, the lower vel rounds you tried- might they be upset by the transition point in the speed of sound?
Thanks, Nath.

KirkD · Post by **KirkD** » Mon Jan 28, 2008 4:39 pm

Nath wrote:Say, the lower vel rounds you tried- might they be upset by the transition point in the speed of sound?
Thanks, Nath.

Interesting thought, Nath. I've not considered this. I'm used to big bores and heavy bullets, where the momentum probably renders such phenomena of little effect. But with a tiny, light, flat-nose bullet, it may be a factor. I'm not buying any more of the Hornady's since I've got well over 900 of the Lyman bullets to use, and I'll be shooting them at at least what I did today.

Grizz · Post by **Grizz** » Mon Jan 28, 2008 4:47 pm

Nice shooting Kirk

So, about the glasses, are they specifically formulated for shooting? Do they help with your binocular vision? That's the part I'm losing. I can no longer superimpose a sharply focused front sight on a sharply focused target. And I have to decide WHICH front sight to use, if you get my drift...

I don't feel that old.

Anyway, do your glasses help with that? I've been thinking about getting the left lens to focus out there, and the right lens to focus on the front sight.

Grizz

KirkD · Post by **KirkD** » Mon Jan 28, 2008 4:56 pm

Grizz, these new glasses are single focal length lenses that are set for me to see best at infinity, which seems to be anything past about 30 inches. I can still see the target when focused on my front sight. Your idea might be worth a try for someone like yourself. You may end up shooting slightly off center, but you could always adjust your sights accordingly.

Post by **Ysabel Kid** » Mon Jan 28, 2008 5:58 pm

Darn it Kirk - I've been trying to resist the .25-20 urge I've had for half a year now, and you are making it really hard to do!!!

Thanks for the range report!

Scott64A · Post by **Scott64A** » Mon Jan 28, 2008 6:04 pm

Excellent rqange report.

I have never reloaded for that gun, but I bet there's something to be said for getting them cooking.
I remember an old timer said something about, "You slowly push a bowling ball to get it going, and you really kick a playground ball."

Just a thought.

engravertom · Post by **engravertom** » Mon Jan 28, 2008 6:34 pm

Thanks for the detailed report. That is one beautiful rifle!

25-20 might be just the ticket for a varmint control rifle for the Missus...

Probably not in the budget though.

Champagne taste on a well water budget!

Tom

Bigahh · Post by **Bigahh** » Mon Jan 28, 2008 7:34 pm

Thats Fine shooting Kirk! Seeing a range report makes me want to get out myself. I 1st have to snow blow my range though. Cabin fever is starting to set in already. Beautiful Rifle you have there also!

wbwizzard · Post by **wbwizzard** » Mon Jan 28, 2008 7:51 pm

There is a lot of good to be said for shooting those little old guns Couldn't help but notice I use almost exactly the same load as you, except that I use 9.5 grains of 4198 in my 94 Marlin made in 1899. I'm thinking abut trying Lil'gun; that ought to work well, you think?

KirkD · Post by **KirkD** » Mon Jan 28, 2008 7:59 pm

wbwizzard wrote: I'm thinking abut trying Lil'gun; that ought to work well, you think?

I've no experience with Lil'gun and I've found the 25-20 so tricky to find a good load for that I wouldn't even want to hazard a guess. I will say this though .... the faster powders were more accurate than the slower powders. I will also say that my experience with the plain base cast bullet was a disaster .... instant leading, wobbling bullets and keyholing bullets from the word 'go'.

Bigahh There was plenty of snow on the range today, but the sun was shining beautifully so I didn't mine slogging through it.

JerryB · Post by **JerryB** » Mon Jan 28, 2008 8:13 pm

Great report Kirk,how deep was the snow?It looks like you should be ready for ground hogs by spring.For some fresh spring meat try a young one fried like rabbit,they are really good.The bigger ones can be baked and then deboned for some good BBQ meat.

KirkD · Post by **KirkD** » Mon Jan 28, 2008 8:20 pm

Jerry, the snow was about a foot deep. After a couple trips to the 100 yard stops, I got a nice path beaten in. I have to confess, that Woodchucks don' give me much of an appetite. Could be because about half the ones I shoot have the Mange. However, I think that by shooting them, I've perhaps reduced the Mange. I didn't notice any mangy Woodchucks last summer. Maybe I got rid of the carriers.

Sixgun · Post by **Sixgun** » Mon Jan 28, 2008 8:23 pm

Kirk,
Not bad pard. There are a couple of things to remember when shooting the 25-20 at high velocity. Your 5 grain load of Unique with the 70 gr. Lyman is almost exactly as the one I use. I use 5.5 gr. and on a warm day they are pushing 1700. I find accuracy is slightly better with 5.5.

Anyway, on to the things I have found on the 25-20. One is that the round is very finicky on sizing diameter. In a half dozen rifles I have tested, all liked .258. Another is that you gotta cast 'em hard, real hard, like 8-9 on the Saeco scale or at least equal to #2 Lyman for the faster velocities. Also, crown condition is very important on the little calibers. Bigger bores are more forgiving on crown condition. You might have a very slight burr causing your flyers or like me, (we are the same age

) the eyes give out from time to time.

Remember, when shooting cast, it can be as many as 20 rounds before groups tighten up. Switching from cast to jacketed and back again will hurt the "tack driving" accuracy also.

All in all, I think your groups are very decent. With open sights and 53 year old eyes, 2 and 1/2" is very acceptable. A couple of years ago I mounted a 3-9 Leupold on a brand new '94 Marlin CL. I was shooting the Remington 86 gr. jacketed with a healthy dose of 2400 with rifle primers. Groups were 1- 1 and 1/2". The cases only lasted 3 times before giving out. I got tired of pulling the front half of the case out of the chamber so I dropped the velocity but acuracy was never as good, about the same as cast. (2 to 2 and 1/2".)

I use the 25-20 from time to time on NRA pistol caliber silhouette. No sight setting change is needed and it really slams down the rams.

Good luck on your quest. I would stay with the same load and bullet, just play with slight changes in powder charges. Try switching primers. I have also played with pistol primers and they can make a difference.-------------------------------------Sixgun

KirkD · Post by **KirkD** » Mon Jan 28, 2008 8:39 pm

Sixgun, that sounds like very good info. Given your load of 5.5 grains of Unique, I think I'll increase mine, maybe to 5.3 for my next try to see how that does. I have to admit that I was sure feeling the lack of practice today.

CowboyTutt · Post by **CowboyTutt** » Mon Jan 28, 2008 9:02 pm

Kirk, a very nice range report! I share some of your vision difficulties, and recently got some new glasses as well. They do seem to help some, but not a lot.

That is one beautiful rifle, Pard. I don't know piq squat about that cartridge, so I'm no help there. I shoot big holes so they are easier to see in the paper!

-Tutt

Post by **Old Savage** » Mon Jan 28, 2008 9:33 pm

Very nice Kirk, you have some good stuff there. How do you rate the new galsses contribution. Though my experience with it was short I will say that it did seem tricky to get a good load because I didn't get one I liked very much.

KirkD · Post by **KirkD** » Mon Jan 28, 2008 9:55 pm

I can see the target a little more clearly, but a lot faster. It doesn't substitute for discipline when taking each shot, however. I found myself a little sloppy today ... maybe it's because I could see a little more sharply. I definitely like the single focal length for everything but close up work.

Scott64A · Post by **Scott64A** » Mon Jan 28, 2008 11:06 pm

wbwizzard wrote:There is a lot of good to be said for shooting those little old guns Couldn't help but notice I use almost exactly the same load as you, except that I use 9.5 grains of 4198 in my 94 Marlin made in 1899. I'm thinking abut trying Lil'gun; that ought to work well, you think?

Hmmm...

I tried Lilgun in my .357mag and got some squibbs. This could have been due to the crimp being too light but some fellers told me Lilgun isn't for light bullets. It likes resistance from a heavy bullet (158gr and over in the straight walled .357mag,) and a good solid crimp.

I bet you could get it to work though, but it is a slow burner.
admittedly, I love it for heavy bullets in the .357mag. It's a very clean burning powder. I also shoots a nice flame and gets the other range goers attention, but that's not why I use it. I just like the way it shoots and cleans up.

Post by **Hobie** » Tue Jan 29, 2008 8:46 am

Great write-up Kirk.

As to L'ilGun, it DOES do better with heavy for caliber bullets. The one exception is the .22 Hornet and .218 Bee but the Bee does do better with the 40 gr. bullet while the Hornet prefers the brick in 35 gr. that Hornady makes. However, in .32 H&R, .357 Mag, .357 Max, and .41 Mag it is the standard weight or heavier bullets that work really well with the powder. IME, when you get to the .44 Mag and .45 Colt, you need to step the bullet weight up to 300 gr. or more to see the ballistic benefits and for the accuracy to come back up to standard.

That might happen with those 60 gr. Hornady and L'ilGun but many folks don't much like them for accuracy anyway... Frankly, I don't see trying to magnumize the .25-20. If anyone wants that kind of performance, get a .256 Mag. I think the brass and gun will be more likely suited to such things.

gamekeeper · Post by **gamekeeper** » Tue Jan 29, 2008 12:41 pm

I wear graduated lenses too they cost a small fortune so when I'm out shooting on the range or in the field I wear a cheap drug store pair of reading glasses, I just choose a pair that are good at a distance but too weak for reading. They seem to work ok but prescription lenses would be a whole lot better!

By the way good shooting Kirk!