doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion German & Austrian Sporting Guns @ doublegunshop.com August Jung Viernau-5.6x61R vom Hofe Super Express

In my earlier writings about working with the 5.6x61R I did mention having fired factory ammo from a real rifle over a chronograph. This was post -war ammo (during the Walter Gehmann period) and was not nearly as fast as the advertised velocity. I don't believe the 3.2 grams "Special Pulver" load was R5, I don't know what it was, but when R5 was ever used I never noticed a reluctance to say it was R5. I only sacrificed one round of this ammo to the chronograph, so whatever the lower velocity was, it would not be enough data to consider it the average velocity. At the same time, I had ammo loaded by my friend and mentor Gene Enterkin with 4350, which was also a slow powder. These velocities with the 70 grain (High Power) bullet were over 3200 fps but did not group at all. In order to be able to show my friend a decent group fired with his rifle, I knew I had to reduce the velocity to match the capability of the bullet. Being aware of the warnings against reducing slow powder loads (specifically 4831) I elected to use my standby IMR 4895. I got groups good enough to show Gene on his Hospice bed, at about 3000 fps with the 4895. Now, the reason for this dissertation. Raimey mentioned using VV140 in place of the powder he thought was R5 as Axel says it and VV140 have similar burning rates. Instead of VV140, I use 4895 to replace R5 as I believe it too has a burning rate similar to R5. Based on this, there is nothing wrong with using either VV140 or 4895 normal handloading cautions are used. If harder bullets are used, going back to the slower powders would be called for in full loads.
There was an earlier question about the comparison of 5.6x57 to 5.6x61 vom Hofe. With the vom Hofe, the limiting factor seems to be the bullet diameter where bullet limitations preclude higher velocity. The limitation with the RWS seems to be the rifling twist rate is 1 turn in 10 inches. This works fine with longer barrels as normal and the 74grain Kegelspitz bullet of the factory load. Bullets longer than the KS or short barrels that lessen the velocity seem to affect accuracy. The 5.6x57 bullet is .224" which is the current standard and is available with very good bullets, but instead of being too soft may be too long. In my own 5.6x57, I intend to use the factory KS bullet and use 60 grain Nosler Partition bullet in hunting handloads.
Mike

It is interesting to see that DEVA has published loading data for the 5.6x61, at least for the rimless version and at least in one edition of its reloading guide.
And interesting to see that some US powders were used , especially IMR4831. Question to US reloaders: how does this compare to H4831?
But the numbers seem odd: 41.5 grains with 70 gr bullet, versus 53.2 grains with a 77 gr bullet?

In any case, my suggestion for such a reloading project (rare cartridge, few and old data) is to use a reloading software and a chronograph. This omits a lot of guesswork and insecurity, expands the range of usable components, and hopefully saves time and money.

"Shooting over a typewriter": I remember that phrase, it's an accusation to imaginative gunwriters, wildcatters etc regarding the data they published. I do not know where this was coined, in the US or in germany?
fuhrmann

fuhrmann.
Bruce Hodgdon started his company by selling Surplus Government gunpowder after WW2. At first, he had a quantity of the powder used in 30-06 ammo. Not knowing what the precise powder number, he determined it burned a little slower than IMR 3031, so he marketed it as 3031 Data Powder. He later marketed it as Hodgdon 4895 or H 4895. When he sold this powder, he bought another large quantity, but it was a slower burning powder than H4895 and was for either 50 cal. or 20mm (I don't remember which). He called this powder Hodgdon 4831 or H4831. Ammunition factories do not load their ammo using a specified charge weight for all lots of powder, instead, they load it to a specific pressure, and the charge weight may vary from lot to lot. When commercial powder mills went back into operation, they used the IMR designation and blended the powder to be consistent from lot to lot, so previously published data could be used. When Hodgdon had to start using newly manufactured powder, it was blended to more or less match the surplus powder. Consequently, IMR 4831 and H4831 are basically the same, but not precisely the same. This situation similar to a powder company having to change manufacturers for their line of powders. The old and new powders are basically the same but not precisely. It is good handloading practice to lower the charge weight when a change is made and work back up watching the normal signs. This also holds when changes in other components are made.
Mike

Hi guys. I have a Gehmann retailed normal Drilling (16/70x16/70) where the rifle calibre is 5,6x61R. It was made 1960 by Ludwig Borovnik and bears his Ferlach 40.xxxx proof number.

I use Bertram Australian brass cases in 5,6x61R. No problems. If I were going to anneal them I would use molten lead, a few seconds inverted in this no deeper than the shoulder, followed by water quenching, (as Nick Harvey recommended). Keep the water bucket well back to avoid any splash-backs. I have necked up and necked back 5,6x61 rimless cases after doing this with no splits. Make sure the primer flash hole is blocked somehow to stop lead getting into the case.

The powder I use is Hodgdon H870, unfortunately no longer made. The data used is from an article on both the rimmed and rimless 5,6 vom Hofe by Dave Wolfe in Handloader magazine. I have two rimless 5,6x61 SEvH rifles and the H870 did not achieve the expected velocities from Handloader in these. However, H870 is quite adequate for the rimmed version, from memory "only" around 3,300 fps. Keep in mind that, when comparing only combination guns, (comparing only apples with apples), this is probably among the fastest .22 calibre cartridges available, especially with modern powders.

In regards to bullets, S&B make a .228" bullet, intended for 5,6x52 Savage Hi-Power, but probably OK in the break-open 5,6x61R. Depending of course, in what the application is. I've used Degol .228" bonded bullets in my rimless 5,6x61 rimless cartridges. Over an Oehler 35p they do around 3,800 fps, (using different Hodgdon powders). I shot a feral goat a very close range in a quartering-away shot using this. A year later I announced to my shooting companion that I had found the exact spot of old skin and bones and that perhaps I could recover the bullet. He though that ridiculous. It was about then that I held the bullet up! It was intact and somewhere I still have it and also the retained weight, which was quite impressive. Another friend found me a very old Speer bullet packet in .228", (meant for the .22 Savage Hi-Power). So old that Speer weren't able to date it by the usual ID marks on their packet. It's a while ago now, but I recall these disintegrated on the way to the target, the same way that Dave Wolfe found with some of his lighter jacketed bullets back in the day.

In terms of vom Hofe velocities being determined "over a type-writer", I saw a pre-war 7mm vom Hofe Mauser action rifle come up for auction online, (in Egun?). As I recall it had a 30" barrel. With the powders of the day, these might well have developed something like the published velocity in that length. But when someone repeats the test in a more modern, much shorter barrel, and perhaps also with old pre-war ammunition, it may well come up much shorter in velocity. I also have here a Mauser 66 in 7x66 SE. Newer powders have nothing to apologize for.

Also, I wonder about that S.E.E. effect. There was, apparently, a shortage of suitable powders and someone marketed an unsuitable French replacement, that may have been part of the explanation. But also, downloading seems to facilitate the S.E.E. effect by allowing the primer flame to jump across the gap left above the small powder charge (when prone) and light both ends at once. I never load less than well up the shoulder as seen when the case is standing upright. I also wonder also if the people who marketed the then new 5,6x57 RWS saw the old vom Hofe round as potential competition and trundled out the "paper tiger" claim and also the S.E.E. one. S.E.E. has been seen even in cartridges like the .38 Special. I'm not sure anyone would argue that old pistol cartridge is "overbored". Newer powers like H4831SC have much better suited the 5,6x61 rimless and the old "overbore" claim might be just a footnote of history now.

BTW, I have never seen a photo of Ernst August vom Hofe. Perhaps in this forum someone has? That would be most interesting.

Also, BTW, the date of the death of this cartridge designer coincided with the Russian arrival at Peenemünde where he was working in 1945.

That was in the notorious Bad Old Times of the early 1950s to the mid 1970s, when Ferlach inundated Germany with an-ever-so-large assortment of tasteless crap.


I do unfortunately recall Dave Wolfe vividly and personally. A thoroughly ignorant and self-inflated Amurrican buffoon; if there ever was one.

I have also heard stories about Dave. However, his well written and most informative article is "The Amazing 5.6x61vom Hofe" in Rifle Magazine January-February 1971. Just note that he is using Hodgdon H4831 as IMR 4831 did not exist then. His best recorded velocity from 70-grain Barnes bullets was up to 3,798 fps.

The two rifles he tested were a single-shot by Eblen of Stuttgart and also a Christopher Funk of Suhl Mauser sporter. The Eblen was interesting for having 2 sets of extractors, one for the rimmed and one for the rimless case. This rifle has Purdey style twin underbites and twin Kersten top extensions, so presumably it's well engineered for the higher pressures of the rimless ammo.

In terms of Ferlach quality, I can only say that I'm most impressed by this Drilling with it's two engraved chamois. I have owned other Ferlach combinations guns by Franz Sodia, Urbas and Winkler.

I forgot to mention the Hornady .228 bullet. This is unfortunately discontinued, but you might still find some at gun-shows. I was in correspondence with Hornady about the appropriate seating die for the .228" calibre bullet. The person replying also had a 5,6 vom Hofe and had just accounted for a whitetail using their bullet, that he was quite happy with.

The two 2 rimless rifles here are a Walther Roell Mauser-sporter and a Frankonia Mauser sporter, (with a Frankonia scope)!

There is more reloading data here in German for the 5,6x61 SE vH, if that is of help. DEVA Wiederladen Vorbereitung und Praxis. 5.Auflage. (2005). Werner Reb also discusses it in Pirsch 5/99 in Die Patronen des Monats. Dave Wolfe sold his Funk rifle to someone who also tested and published their data on it. I have a copy somewhere.

Werner Reb also covered the 5,6x61 and 5,6x61R (separately) in "Wiederladen für Jäger und Schützen" (1984). Note only Rottweil powders and H870. Jeff Munnell purchased Dave Wolfe's Funk Mauser and published his loads. He was using converted 9,3x62 brass.

For those following this link who might be interested, the article by Dave Wolfe was in Rifle issue #13 in 1971. The publishers should still be able to supply by email. Some good and still relevant data there. Jeff Munnell published in The Accurate Rifle Magazine, probably around the 2002 era. I don't have the exact date of his 5,6x61 SEvH article as I only have his manuscript. Also he published articles on 8x72R, 8x68S, 9,3x62, the various 8mm cartridges (such as 8x57R/360), 9,3x72R, 9,3x74R, 9.5x57 Mannlicher-Schoenauer and even one on the .30-06.

Jeff made 5,6x61 SE vH brass using 9,3x62 parent brass and sized the neck down in 5 separate passes, using a .350 Rem. Mag sizer die, 7.5x55 Swiss full-length sizer, .284 Win. full length sizer, 6.5 Rem, Mag. full length sizer and finally a 5,6x61 SEvH full length sizer. The full instructions are in his article. The 9,3x62 Norma parent brass has a .473" head diameter when actually measured. His 5,6x61 SEvH brass was .476", so it was a much better fit than .30-06 or 8x57mm, for instance which were both 8-10 thou smaller.

It's getting harder to import firearms related material from the USA or EU, so this may help someone in need.

I do wish you had posted that earlier when I was sourcing artikels as I now have >>The Rifle<< Issue #13 - Jan - 1971 w/ Al Miller's artikel. I have 80 grain bullets, per the stamp on the tube, from Northern Precision and I have about settled on VV N160, although Miller seems to favour 4350. I do wish the authors had added the designation before the powder number.

Hochachtungsvoll,

Raimey
rse

Does anyone have, or have access, to one of the aforementioned ballistic programs to see what say 45 grains of VV N160 behind a 80 grain bullet might result?

Hochachtungsvoll,

Raimey
rse