Jump to content
UKV - The Place for Precision Rifle Enthusiasts

VarmLR

Members
  • Content count

    1,243
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About VarmLR

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://www.referencefidelitycomponents.co.uk

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Gloucester
  • Interests
    Yes.

Recent Profile Visitors

1,134 profile views
  1. VarmLR

    6.5CM/RS62 Updates

    I don't quite see the logic there as RS 62 is single base (unless comparative load results are for way less charge using RS60), lower energy and the conclusion is that reverting to LR brass and RS62 will give more than adequate velocity for what is a very slippery bullet. 43gr of RS62 in LR brass is not that stiff a load. Most of my shooting is sub 700 yds with perhaps once monthly incursions to 1000 and at that range I have no problems with accuracy using that powder...it's one of the most accurate load combinations that I've shot in fact. I guess the point is that I can't really see much benefit in using SR brass but am quite happy using RS62.
  2. VarmLR

    rebarrel time

    Very nice. Is that an IOR Recon sat atop?
  3. VarmLR

    6.5CM/RS62 Updates

    I thought it might be of interest to those dipping their toes into 6.5CM to share ongoing data. I have now put around 400 rounds through the TAC A1 and the barrel seems to have gained velocity quite considerably over new, with velocities checked every 100 rounds. I have also logged chrony'd velocities with temperature all with the same load. Results as follows: 139 Scenar, 44gr RS62/SR Lapua brass/Murom KVB223 Magnum: 10shot strings. New barrel/fresh brass/5 degrees C 2633fps 31ES/SD10 (not good on any level) 200 Rounds/1F brass/10 degrees 2650fps 16ES/SD9 350 Rounds/1F brass/22 degrees 2701fps 15ES/SD6 400 Rounds/1F brass/24 degrees 2707fps 15ES/SD5.8 I haven't batched bullets or brass and haven't loaded to any greater tolerance than 0.1gr so the stats are respectable enough but can be improved to get everything into single figures with a little more care. Temp sensitivity appears to be 4 to 5fps/degree which is a surprise as I had reckoned this powder to be less temp sensitive than viht,; however, how much of the velocity increase is due to the barrel speeding up with bedding in and how much is temperature related is a moot point so probably not worth drawing too many conclusions. Incidental comparisons with a shooting colleague using LR primers in 6.5 gave 100 fps more (24 degrees C) for almost 1 full grain less powder (same barrel length). The trade off using SR brass is longer brass life but less velocity potential. I was shooting 100% fill ratio loads so 2700fps seems to be the limit with SR brass in my rifle with RS62. I could seat out another 20 thou and compress loads slightly and probably make 2750 to 2800fps max. but it isn't worth going to extremes for the pressure rise. I will update this post further when I have another hundred or so rounds through the barrel just to double check that the increases have been more related to barrel bedding than temperature issues but my own conclusions are that for the ES/SD I'm achieving, it is not worth going to SR brass for CM when many people now seem to get 10 or more reloads from good quality LR brass for less powder used and similar SD results.
  4. VarmLR

    Rebarrel from 223 to 204

    I was being polite. Take your personal comments elsewhere.
  5. VarmLR

    Rebarrel from 223 to 204

    All of which goes to demonstrate that the .204 in reality has no significant advantage over a .223 in terms of scrutinising numbers for realistic shooting distances. If you want to shoot precision, in the wind at 600, pick a more suitable calibre. In terms of velocities, it seems pretty widely known that claimed speeds (ie those not chronographed by the shooter) where .204 is concerned are often over-egged or not representative of what to expect with a typcal 20 inch tube. It's a bit of a well worn and tired argument. Personally, I think worrying about accuracy and bullet selection is way more important than endless debates over trajectory. Once out beyond 100 yards on small quarry, nothing is laser-like and you have to hold off or dial for everything so shooters reading this may be better advised to find out with some precision (and that doesn't mean from exclusive use of drop charts derived from ballistic apps) their actual drops and then practice for holding off for wind etc. Developing accurate drop charts based on your chosen round is frankly more important than agonising over calibre comparisons...all imho of course. Otherwise pick what you fancy or like shooting. End result is practice makes perfect.
  6. VarmLR

    Rebarrel from 223 to 204

    You can't have both "flat shooting" and "little energy". The point about higher velocities besides suffering less wind drift (form factor and BC dependant) and drop, they make for more efficient kills through hydraulic shock, A safe shot is a safe shot so this whole business about bullets carrying with high energy points towards an assumption of no safe backstop. So no, there is no argument for limiting velocities other than where a worked up load proves more accurate at lower velocities. Limiting the carrying of energy is the sort of comment I'd expect from an inexperienced FEO, not a shooter.
  7. VarmLR

    Font Colour

    Loads better.
  8. VarmLR

    Font Colour

    That as well.....LoL.... You know you're getting old when you can't remember Pink Floyd track names.
  9. VarmLR

    Rebarrel from 223 to 204

    That seems about the size of it. I can get close on .204 velocities with 40 to 50grn bullets in my .223 (up to 3500fps) but use a slightly longer barrel than the modern norm. I prefer using heaver higher BC bullets. If you limit your shooting to 300 yards, there really doesn't seem to be a lot of difference or advantage of one cal over the other, the .223 retaining greater versatility imho.
  10. I get the same thing so simply cut my patches down until you don't need the strength of a silver-back gorilla to push them through which also increases the chances of bowing the rod, (bore guide or not,)and makes it easier to control the rod near the crown. I use Pro-shot stainless and Tipton Carbon rods. Pro-shot are more rigid and my preferred cleaning rod.
  11. VarmLR

    Font Colour

    Psychedelic man....it makes me want to spin up Piper at the Gates of Dawn...Intergalactic Overdrive
  12. VarmLR

    George Balfour

    RIP George. You will be fondly remembered.
  13. No. Didn't fancy paying those prices. The TMK works well for me.
  14. The 175 TMK is probably the best .308 bullet I've shot at 1000 from a relatively short 24 inch tube and exhibits less wind drift than the 155's I was shooting at much higher velocities, form factors an' all considered, but that may nor be the case for everyone. There are better bullets in a similar class of course, and the 185 Juggernaut is probably one of them. It depends on barrel length and whether a barrel likes a particular bullet too. No point in using 155's from a 20 inch barrel as you simply can't get engugh velocity from them to make them work well at 1000 for example, irresepctive of all their pointiness or boat-tailiness, whereas the 175 TMK works very well and can be kept above transonic (easily as it happens in my own 24 inch barrel length). Generalisations are just that and high BC I would have thought does indeed point to what sort of wind bucking performance to expect, along with the form factor and the velocity (ie they need to be considered together to get the full picture). Any ballistic app can churn out wind drift and comparing each bullet for a 10mph wind using an app is as good a way as any to do the homework before trying a bullet to compare. There's little point either in talking about how flat shooting a bullet is if the guy asking the question can't get the velocities in his rifle to make the comparison worthwhile, so when comparing bullets, I guess you have to take a punt at what sort of velocities are realistically expected in each bullet class for the rifle they're to be shot in. What works well in a long barrel may be out-classed in a shorter barrel by heavier, higher BC bullets. At least that's my own findings with .308. The 6.5 is a different proposition entirely. For example, you can make the 123gr scenar work as well as, or better than the 139gr higher BC bullet simply because it can be driven fast enough, even in shorter barrels, to give it the edge. I have considered the #2156 new Palma in my own .308 but with factory chamber, I can't get it close enough to the lands to make it work properly, as it isn't jump tolerant...another consideration when comparing bullets.
  15. VarmLR

    Depth of bullet inside the case

    +1 to Andrew's comments. Some of my best loads are seated deep and all of my best loads have a 95% or greater fill ratio, some of the very best being slightly compressed loads. If the accuracy is good enough for the distances you shoot at, don't worry about chasing the lands and squeezing more powder in for higher velocities. Don't worry about chasing higher velocities if they are not needed. It seems obvious, but looking for big numbers when big numbers aren't always needed just wears the barrel out faster and costs more hard-earned to shoot. The differences that 100fps makes at the muzzle may not be that great at distance depending on BC, but may lift a moderate load into a hot load. I never think that's a good equation to use or worth burning a barrel out quicker for. I find an accurate load and stick with it.
×

Important Information

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