Does anyone have a good load for a .300 Sherwood? I have an NEI mould which casts out at 130grn with a 20:1 mix. Have been using 9grn of 4227 but it is very position sensitive in the long thin case.
Point the rifle at the ground and tap the stock before shooting: 1080ft/sec.
Point the rifle up in the air and tap the stock: 1340 ft / sec.
Help!
Fred.

Kapok or similar was suggested on the range this morning (it is now 5.15pm in the UK). I don't like fillers with smokeless powder but I might be driven to try it!
The "pointing up before firing" start gave flat primers (Small pistol) but the "Pointing down" start gave no signs of pressure and a run of 9 consecutive bulls fired off-hand at 50 metres. The 10th shot was a seven and down to me.
Thinking of trying 5744.
Fred.

Fred,
I have a BSA NO.6 take-down in 300 Extra Long (Sherwood). I use a 147 gr. bullet with 11gr. H4227 at 1450 fps. This is quite close to the original specs.  With the bullet about .36in into the case this amount of powder fills the case to at least 80%.
In an earlier post you said you had to lower the lever to get the shell to chamber. Mine goes in with no problem. I have noticed the groove in the top of the breech block is cut a little deeper than other calibers in order to load a longer shell.
I have another .300 Exrta Long that has been rebarrelled to 6.5X50R 
(made from a 5.6X50R). With the bullet seated far out this is a long round. With the .300 Extra Long breech block this round will chamber.
Using a regular BSA Cadet breech block it will not chamber.

Fred,
I have a reprint of an old BSA catalog. There is no date but from the information stated in the catalog I would guess the date about 1912-13.
It has the .300 Extra Long using a 140 gr. nickel based bullet at 1450 fps. 
I purchased my bullets. According to the box they came from a Lyman mold #300316. They do have gas checks. My primers look ok and no problems with leading. Acuracy has been about 3 to 4 inches at 100 yards. I can do much better with my .310 Cadets.

Fred,
I have seen several discussions on the different models of BSA rifles. Since they were not marked by model number there is a lot of different opinions. My opinions are based on the catalog I have and the U.K. , N.R.A. Historic Web Site. The No. 8 is a thin wall receiver with a heavy 25 1/4 in. barrel. To quote the catalog, " These models( NO.8 & NO. 9 ) are 12ozs. heavier than the Models 4-7. The extra weight lies entirely in the barrel." Could your rifle be a NO. 12?
My favorite model is the NO.6. Thin wall receiver with light weight 24 1/4 in. barrel. I have them in .22, 32/20, and 300 Extra Long. I would like to find a .310 and a .297/230.
The load I gave is the only one I have ever tried in the .300 Extra Long. I should try to improve the accuracy by trying some other loads.
I have had some good results in the .310 using Hodgden Titegroup.  3.5 gr. hardly covers the primer but I could not find any evidence of position sensitivity.

Ziplocjoe:
I live about 20miles from the old BSA factory and I have friends who used to work there and in the proof house. My Sherwood is a puzzle to them:
Serial number is low, indicating manufacture about 1909/1910.
Barrel is the heavy target type, indicating that it is a no8, but it is about 2.5" longer than the standard no8.
Receiver is thick walled. 
The barrel has the usual BSA markings on it, but, just behind the Nocks Form on the reciever it is marked:"A.G. Parker". It has not been relined.
The stock is a beautiful dense walnut and the forend is a none standard shape.
I call it a number 8 because that is the nearest thing to it in the catalogue but, at the time it was made, you could order what you wanted if you had enough money.
Fred

Plus No6, which is also non-standard, having no barrel mounted opensight and also having the optional pistol grip.
310 Cadet, which is standard apart from the no8 sight.
Greener .22 takedown.
Fred.

Double D: I agree with you: I have John Knibbs book plus several old catalogues and it is easy to get confused. However. I have just spent a pleasant half hour looking through said catalogues and I now agree that the Sherwood is closer to a model 12 than a model 8, since the main difference appears to be the thick sided receiver.
We have strayed away from my original request: what I want is more loading data!
Fred.