Jump to content

Big Al

Yellow Riband
  • Content count

    1,327
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About Big Al

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Northumberland

Recent Profile Visitors

758 profile views
  1. 6BRA

    Next to a standard 6BR Im hoping this little guy will be a giant slayer
  2. Have you tried chambering a round then removing it and comparing the runout again?
  3. Why not Remington Varmint which is a common Sassen profile? Its 20mm at the muzzle and at 22" isn't heavy. I profile a lot of my own blanks and this one is popular below, again its 20mm at the muzzle but running parallel until the swamp, (the Rem Varmint tapers towards the swamp so is heavier) it save a little weight over a Rem Varmint but still gives a decent amount of material around the crown to allow for larger moderator threads if required. It will also hold its accuracy for a few more shots before any heat induced wandering occurs that is more common with thin sporter profiles. Alternatively deal with someone who can profile the barrel to fit your stock the way you want it to.
  4. I finished this rifle a couple of weeks ago and is now awaiting load development. Its very much the kind of rifle I like and would be happy to own this one myself. After talking the project through with my customer and deciding on the type of rifle he wanted and the uses he would have for it he then gave me a bit of free reign as to the final spec and cosmetics. He wanted something a little different and with a classy understated look rather than blingy. We are both happy with the end result. The idea was to make a long range precision varminting rifle that was also capable of 600yd & 1000yd benchrest competitions. The rifle weighs 16.95lb as seen so qualifies as a benchrest light gun and the bag rider plates are for shooting from rests, they can be removed in seconds for field use and a bipod fitted to the Anschutz rail. The spec is as follows; Mausingfield action from the American Rifle Company Bartlein 5R chambered in 6.5x47 and throated for 140's Manners T4A carbon stock Bix & Andy benchrest trigger Tier One bottom metal for an AI 5 shot mag Anshutz rail My own design bag riders and muzzle brake IOR Terminator 12-52x56
  5. 6mm calibre choice

    I can see why you want to be able to spot your strikes, I feel the same. As such I use a .224 cal and a lot less powder and I can then see the hits, after all its a fox in the dark not a red stag on a hill 350yds away. Bullets like 55gr vmax or SBK are devastating on Charlie way out to distances I wouldn't consider in the dark, if you launch them from a suitable case they will have at least as good ballistics over night time fox shooting ranges than your planned case. Something like a 22BR or 22/250 is plenty or if you want the next level up 22/243, 22 Middlestead or 22x47 - will all smash your foxes just as well and give you a much better chance of seeing the hits. Of course you might just have a 6x284 itch that needs scratching in which case get one
  6. Neck sizing v full-length sizing

    Yes, the bullet could be held in the neck over a different length depending on how much the shoulder was bumped while the CAOL and CBTO would remain the same. Typically we are talking here about bumping a shoulder a couple of thou so thats how much different the hold would be. I can't say as Ive not tested this but I would be surprised if having a couple of thou more or less bearing surface to neck contact mattered. Its hard enough to really see a meaningful difference when adjusting seating depth by so little although some would argue that point.
  7. Neck sizing v full-length sizing

    OK, I thought that was what you were saying, now have a think about it. Your COAL or CBTO measurement is taken from the base of the case to either the end of the bullet or the ogive, this measurement will remain the same regardless of where the shoulder is.
  8. 'Works in everything' N140 load for 6.5x47?

    What exactly are your requirements from this rifle and load Matt? Is it for stalking, LR varminting or target shooting etc? Do you now expect to use this load all year round?
  9. 'Works in everything' N140 load for 6.5x47?

    With respect Matt, we can all bung a load together in the car park and shoot it in a competition, it doesn't really prove much. Im more interested in winning the competition and then doing it enough times to win the Championship. I suppose its very much a horses for courses situation and the 'sweet load' may well exist to a degree depending on what your requirements are regarding accuracy and consistency/repeatability. As for successful sniping/target and the loads used, its not really that precise is it? I was discussing a target rifle build recently with a customer who was agonising over his new build and really trying to explore the very smallest differences that might gain me a small advantage in 1000yd benchrest. I seemed to calm him a little when we looked at the overall picture, he will be lying in a muddy field wearing some form of bondage suit shooting dodgy Lithuanian factory ammo through open sights. The decision between a BAT/Borden or RPA/Barnard action seemed to pale into insignificance Getting back to the original point. Ive worked a lot with load development both for my competition rifle but also those I have built for customers. As well as telling you what Ive seen with powders charges Ive also seen how the same load wont transfer readily to other rifles of the same spec. Heres another example; Within the space of a month around August I built three different 6.5x47s all to very similar specs all to shoot the same 140 Berger Hydrid bullet. All were chambered identically, all showed the same level of machining accuracy and all were throated the same to within 0.002" on COAL, all used the same 5R 8 twist Bartlein barrels. My rifle was the first one, the next customers ended up with exactly the same OCW results so ran with the same charge weight albeit his seating depth was optimised at 0.005" different to mine and the guy used this rifle to break the UKBRA 600yd heavy gun small group on its first outing - 5 shot group measured at 1.058" I did the load development for the third gun and it wouldn't shoot the exact same batch of H4350 for toffee! The results of the OCW although accurate enough to assure me there was nothing wrong with the rifle build clearly showed that barrel didn't like the bullet/powder combo. Examples like this further re-enfoce to me that you can't just cobble a load together based on the findings of others and expect it to shoot in a different rifle. Depending on the standards required by the shooter it might work in a broad sense to some degree but not well enough for the principle to go unchallenged.
  10. 'Works in everything' N140 load for 6.5x47?

    Double post.
  11. 'Works in everything' N140 load for 6.5x47?

    Quite the contrary Matt, I would say it is through experience I would say what I said and also have the data and results to back it up. Lets take a look at your example for the 6.5x47 Lapua, a cartridge I would say I have quite a lot of experience of but this would also apply to all calibers equally. They guys who make powder simply can't make it consistently enough for us to have these 'sweet spots' you talk about while maintaining a good level of accuracy and just as importantly consistency. For example, 37.5gr of RL15 is highly likely to differ from batch to batch, at the least it might require some seating depth tuning to bring different batches within a common level of accuracy but quite often it will need a new optimum charge weight to be established. Here is an example of what I say from very recent experience, I have also seen it numerous times both with my own and others rifles, some I built, others I didn't but the theme remains the same. The targets below are from my benchrest gun which is chambered in 6.5x47 and shooting 140 Hybrids. This first test was conducted in early September using a new unopened tub of H4350. At the time I only had that one tub of H4350 so I developed the load via an OCW and then seating depth testing, in the end the rifle was shooting in the low 0.2s for 5 shots at 100yds. When I say low 0.2s I dont mean it shot one group, my figures are based on 4x 5 shot aggregates to conclude ultimate accuracy. I use 3 shot groups for OCW testing as there are enough shots to show a trend. The rifle then shot very well in the final round of the UKBRA 1000yd benchrest championship. Because I had only one tub of H4350 at the time of developing this load I knew I would need to get enough new powder to see me through the winter 600yd championship. I ordered 5 tubs of H4350, as expected when they arrived they were a different batch to the first one so the same OCW test needed to be repeated followed by a further seating depth test. All my load development is conducted in the same manner at the same range on the same bench etc, I shoot using wind flags and without doubt my process is consistent and repeatable. Comparing the two targets the difference in the powder is clear to see, nothing else in the tests changed, my gun set-up takes out of the equation shooter error. The load that was optimised from the first target ended up being 40.7gr H4350 with a CBTO of 2.140" The load that was optimised from the second target ended up being 40.0gr H4350 with a CBTO of 2.130" The second load shot just as well as the first in terms of ultimate accuracy with a 5 shot agg of low 0.2s This is just a very up-to-date example but I could show or tell you about many more. Just look at the difference in accuracy between the first targets groups at 40.6 and 40.8 and compare them to the second targets groups for the same charge weight of the same powder but a different batch! Just how much would this change your sweet 37.5gr of RL15 you mention? In fact, which batch of 37.5gr actually showed this accuracy among the many different ones Alliant have produced? In the summer I was running a 6 Dasher barrel on this same gun and I was running 33.7gr Varget, the rifle was producing the same level of accuracy, 5 shots agging around 0.250". With a new batch of Varget I loaded a test using the same charge weight and seating depth, the same gun under all the same conditions was now agging in the 0.5s - once I re-tested and adjusted for this new batch of powder the rifle was back shooting the same groups again. As I said, I could quote you numerous examples of this and to be honest any number of high level shooters would tell you the same. That you haven't experience of this level of load development it doesn't mean the same is true of others
  12. 'Works in everything' N140 load for 6.5x47?

    Worked as in it made a bang and a bullet left the barrel? I guess if 'works' is used in the loosest term then you have a point but for anyone looking to get the best from their particular rifle then no, random load data doesn't work consistently across enough rifles to make it a valid process. Anyone who thinks that a fixed powder charge of any powder with a bullet seated at a fixed OAL will deliver the best results over a wide range of different barrels simply hasn't done enough load developing
  13. 'Works in everything' N140 load for 6.5x47?

    Can there really be such a thing? Considering the differences I see between batches of the same powder I think the idea is little more than a fantasy.
  14. RFD transfer rules

    Could you be a bit more specific as to the wording within the Firearms Act that covers this topic as far as you understand.
×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy