Jump to content
UKV - The Place for Precision Rifle Enthusiasts

VarmLR

Members
  • Content count

    1,524
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by VarmLR

  1. It pays to stick with EITHER moa scopes OR MRad, whichever you prefer using. Otherwise it can just confuse you when remembering how far to dial for each scope/rifle combo. I converted over to Mils for all of my scopes and whilst SFP has the advantage that the ret stays the same thickness at all ranges, calling shots and adjusting is way easier using FFP if as you simply observe the bullet strike, count the milrads or MOA marks (dots or hashes) from target centre and adjust the scope by that exact amount and it works like this for all magnifications. I prefer working with Mils now as it's more intuitive for me, but others prefer to stick with MOA. As already said, just ensure that the ret matches the adjustments. It's a joke that companies are still producing scopes with milrad rets and moa adjustments....makes no sense at all. FFP rets aren't necessarily thicker either...it depends on how fine they're made! My S&B 5-25 at full mag in FFP retains a fine ret centre but the flip side is at low mag it's too fine to use in anything but excellent lighting. For fixed distance shot comps, F-Class, Bench-rest or whatever, it doesn't matter what you use and many prefer a good SFP, calling adjustments based (as described by Pops above) on target rings.
  2. As new. Complete with removable cleanable base. Ideal for the back of a truck or for indoor kennelling. Folds flat for storage. This isn't one of the cheap ones but is good and sturdy. Would suit a large GWP or a couple of spaniels. Cost me about £90. Take £50 for it. Collection only, Dursley, Glos.
  3. VarmLR

    Yardley - outstanding (if true)

    Shame that doesn't seem to work with Packham!
  4. VarmLR

    Tikka tac chassis v after market chassis

    Another thumbs up for the Tic-Tac. Some of this is down to personal choice and ergonomics differ between people. However, the comment about hinge strength has me scratching my head because that hinge seems rock solid and close up firmly with a pleasing "clunk". Ergonomics I also find nigh on perfect for me. I have a few gripes and it's the cost cutting in some areas. For one, LOP could have been made a lot easier by having an adjustable butt plate altered with a thumb-wheel instead of those awkward shimmed plates. The cheek piece whilst ok could have been better shaped. Other than that I'm impressed with the quality, having had it apart a few times now, and it shoots well. I did compare it with a few after-market chassis but tbh, they didn't offer anything much over the stock factory bar some nicer butt stock designs so I've kept mine standard and am pleased with it. I also compared with Ruger and Sabatti. Whilst initially impressed with Sabatti build quality, someone I know has got rid of his because it was a bit of a shocker build-wise. Some parts didn't fit that well and corrosion set in quite rapidly. Could have been a Friday afternoon one for sure but the T3x-TAC seemed far more polished and better made to me. I preferred build over the Ruger too. I'd rather have the Ruger's all-in-line design but it felt cheap compared with the T3. Haven't yet handled the improved Ruger which by all accounts is much better.
  5. VarmLR

    Starting loads...useless?

    The best loads for most of my rifles are somewhere not far-off 3/4 the way between (recommended) starting and max loads. To save load development time and budget, I usually start 5 to 6% under max and use OCW to get to the nodes quickly. I'll often have two good nodes within that band. This seems to work for me irrespective of the calibre and it's probably no small coincidence that some of these loads tally fairly well with recommended accuracy loads. I have loads for 223 and 308 which are almost smack on what Sierra recommend as their accuracy choices using the same powders/bullets. I've generally found their recommendations to be reliable. As Laurie says, it's rarely worth starting at min, partly for economy but also because obturation is sometimes not properly achieved as witnessed by the carbon fouling of the brass beyond the neck area for some chamber/brass combos, which differs from rifle to rifle of the same make and calibre. No-one in their right mind would start at max, but there's a few about who will take that risk, somewhat bizarrely. They are possible candidates for the Darwin awards. I recall a story (haven't many of us?) where an elderly farmer, now long since gone, used the same powder for years with his .308 which he used for deer control. When asked what loads he used, he shrugged and said that he filled it up to the base of the neck and smacked the bullet home (I think using a Lee Load All). Whilst this seems like madness, truth is that with some powders and 150 to 155grn bullets, you're probably pretty safe with .308 but it's not to be recommended!!!
  6. VarmLR

    RS52 temperature/MV curve

    Don't know about RS52 but I've done it with RS62 and use a temperature sensitivity factor of 1.5 based upon tested results. May or may not be similar but I agree that 2.4 seems a little high. RS50 is much less. Sensitivity factor based on limited data was closer to 0.3 (I wouldn't take that as gospel though as it was only calculated over a few measurements from 10 to 18 degrees based on average MVs for 5 shot groups). Some of the 62 batches vary a bit, that may well affect things too. RS52 being the higher energy powder uses the same infusion chemistry as Vhit 500 series, and I believe (based on something Laurie said some time ago) that Nitrochemie sold the process to Vhit during the late 90's. However, RS have refined the technology and from my own testing of Vhit V's RS powders, the RS powders come out more stable every time and I've never experienced over-pressure during warm weather like I have with Vhit powders. It was one of the reasons I drifted away from using Vhit for 308 and 6.5 where my hot loads often spiked in hot conditions, sometimes alarmingly so. I learned never to load to max in 308 but drop development loads done in spring or autumn down by a full grain for summer use as a max load with some leeway. I haven't had to do that using RS and think that my RS62 sensitivity factor is skewed high as I noticed a batch variation on the last lot I bought where it gave consistently higher MVs at the same temperatures, some 25fps up on the previous batch. It's hard to be certain bearing in mind that variation with RS62 (I check each batch now and set a fresh SF for each). For 52, it will be lower than Vhit N540 etc, so I would think you'd be probably in the ballpark if using a figure between the RS50 and say 1 (ie 0.3 to 1.0). 2.4 seems way too high based on my own experience of these powders. There may be someone along though that could offer some better data for you.
  7. VarmLR

    65 creedmoor powders

    In my Tic-Tac (as above), this is the average taken over several reloading batches: RS 62; Scenar 139 loaded 20 thou off lands; Murom KVB-223 Magnum primers; 44g RS62, Lapua SRP Brass; MV average = 2705fps; SD = 11; ES = 15 (Best was SD5; ES9: Worst was SD16; ES 30) Group average (still day 100yds): 0.3 moa Group (best) = 0.18moa Group (worst) = 0.68 moa Group best (600m) = 0.75moa Group best (900m) = 1.1 moa Haven't tried different primers but have some CCI 250s to play with. May switch to LRP Brass as loads are more economical and folk seem to be getting equivalent ES/SD with large rifle brass loads.
  8. VarmLR

    N140 vs N150 in creedmoor

    I had much the same results using RS62/140 SSTs. A good node from a 24 inch barrel was 2620fps. Haven't tried higher with that load as it's accurate and adequate for deer.
  9. VarmLR

    Velocity plateaus in load testing: Why?

    I think that he is just describing matching barrel time, except for one thing....isn't it possible to achieve similar MV's with slight variations on barrel time due to differences in pressure curve, and distance from the lands? I only know that switching powders with my .223 that I've had similar results with the same bullet and different powder so an element of that holds water. As Mark says though, this may not hold true with all bullets. Some respond better with reduced jump to the lands as they are less jump tolerant than others. I have only had success with Satterlee with jump tolerant bullets as I rarely load close to the lands. I think that the debate is healthy, as it's provoking thought into different areas of internal ballistics that we perhaps rarely discuss in detail.
  10. VarmLR

    Velocity plateaus in load testing: Why?

    I've tried Satterlee and OCW. Whilst I could achieve repeatable results using OCW, Satterlee was something of a challenge, but I finally got there (in .223 at least). To be fair to Scott Satterlee, he explains that in order to stand a snowball's chance, you need to be meticulous about brass prep, bullet and charge consistency otherwise it can be a waste of time and money. Brass should ideally be batched by volume and neck tension uniformed between cases. Bullets should be batched by mass and base to ogive measurement. Powder charge ought to be as consistently tight on tolerance as you can get it. His explanation is that unlike OCW, Satterlee concentrates on optimal bullet velocity (not charge weight, as powders will vary batch to batch) because the results are pressure dependant. Using different powders, he has achieved the same results with the same bullet provided the results are matched in velocity. In other words, even using different powders, once a node velocity is found, loading to the middle often results in tiny groups and low ES/SD. I have done this with 69TMK and 60 Vmax bullets using batched, annealed brass, and after loading have use a lee crimp die to try and uniform neck tension. For my 60vmax bullets, this resulted in an ES over 5 shots of zero at my first attempt once I'd picked the middle load. I repeated that test at that velocity (3150fps) many times now and average ES is within single figures. The 69TMK bullets showed three different velocity plateaus, the attached graphical representation is shown below for 12 different loads. I have repeated this with very similar results on velocity. Using OCW I coincidentally got a load which corresponded to load ref 6 (24.6gr RS50), so it agreed with the Satterlee results. I don't claim to fully understand why powders have these pressure insensitive regions but earlier mention of coatings behaviour may well be something to do with it. I have not had much luck replicating Satterlee results though in 6.5 CM to date. I don't know why but it's most likely something I'm not taking enough care on in the brass prep stage. The Satterlee method spat out a load which I then tried at 600m and it wasn't that good. SD for that load was quite high, as was ES so my own findings confirm that whilst there's something in the Satterlee method, test groups of the so-called central pressure insensitive load should be shot using statistically reliable 5 or 7 shot groups and repeated to determine ES. If it's unreliable, then it's back to square one. That's why I prefer to use OCW and determine the lowest ES node. Once that's found, then in spite of powder batch variations, I know that all I need do is find a load with the new powder batch that matches the velocity of the old batch and I have my node. That has been a very reliable method and here, I concur with Satterlee as he's had much success replicating the same MVs across various powders for the same bullet. It takes longer to do but at least results on paper can be corroborated between batches and the velocity is there or thereabouts each time.
  11. VarmLR

    quality mincer

    Mine seems to work perfectly. It only clogs if lots of gristle is forced through it.
  12. Just an update for anyone who has experienced issues using exact for cal mods on TAC A1s: There's an issue which affects some CTR and some TAC A1 rifles whereby the threads have no been undercut as according to Tikka "they were designed for use with a clamped muzzle brake and do not require an undercut". Interestingly, the muzzle brake supplied with the 6.5 rifle is actually a 30 cal muzzle break, so I see Tikka's response as a cop-out for not doing the job properly in the first place and I have lost trust in the brand over this issue. Consequently, as in my case, some mods may not square up properly at the end of the thread and this pulls the mod off centre at the muzzle end, so causing the bullet to strike the inside of the mod. It has nothing to do with the use of correct for cal mods and long bullets, and everything to do with mods being pulled off axis when tightened. This issue does not affect everyone concerned because many use mods with a bore large for calibre, ie 30 cal mods on a 6.5, plus some manufacturers (like Stallon) sell mods which cover a range of cals, so for a 6.5, their cal is labelled as "up to 30 cal". GMKs response to this was fair and swift. They aimed to rectify things for the UK market quickly, and hats off to them, they have delivered on their promise. They met with representatives of Tikka and on their return, promised to sort the issue for all UK customers who have CTR/TAC A1 rifles which may be affected. The solution was to have precision made SS washers which act as a spacer to cover the area of the barrel which ought to have been properly undercut. You will need 4 of the supplied washers to cover this area and will need to speak with the RFD who sold you your CTR/TAC A1 and they will be supplied FOC by GMK. This to my mind is not an ideal situation because washers can carbon up rapidly and are easily lost or damaged due to being very thin. For my part, I have chosen to have my thread properly undercut so that the mod squares up properly against the main barrel. This, however, will invalidate any warranty. It's a ridiculous situation and should never have occured but there are now readily adoptable solutions. The third solution is to have your mod thread counterbored providing that you can afford to lose approx 2mm of thread.
  13. VarmLR

    Seating depth for .223 80gr Sierra MK?

    Michal, What load of RS52 are you using? I've had very good results with the 70gr TMKs in 1:8 .223 barrel using RS50 The smk is very jump tolerant so I suspect something else is amiss. Have you access to a chrony as this can help a lot with load dev?
  14. LoL...absolutely! It's just coming back into biking season here (at least for me) but the heated grips keep the hands nice and warm on chillier mornings. Have Spain in my sights for a tour later in the year and perhaps the West coast of Scotland. Should be lots of shooting too... Sounds like you got a load almost dialled in first attempt....LRP Brass and between 42 and 43gr H4350 at a rough guess perhaps?
  15. I did try the factory brake and it's ok but I don't have much to compare it with tbh. I guess if you didn't get on with it, it's only a one minute job to swap a mod back in, granted POI will shift between them. I've had that Zen moment more than a few times, once during a comp and swore silently, almost biting my tongue when I "missed the moment!" Weather here is picking up, enough that I actually went out and put a few miles up on the GSA today after shodding it with fresh boots!
  16. VarmLR

    Long range scope options.

    S&B PMII 5-25 is what I've been using for LR alongside a Nightforce and Bushnell DMR. All are good, the S&B is edge to edge sharp and with the fine PL4 ret, is very capable at 1300yds. I looked at the higher mag ones but factoring in mirage and keeping the sight picture steady just didn't see the need for higher mags although I can well understand why bench-rest shooters might.
  17. Congrats on your purchase Andrew. Hope you get on with the tic-tac. Must admit, I took to mine straight away. The only thing (in 6.5CM) that is sometimes irksome is the feed cycle isn't always reliable if done without slow deliberation such that the bolt comes back fully. The number of times I've squeezed the trigger on an empty chamber thinking I've cycled a round is embarrassing. Probably more my problem than the rifles, but never had this with my T3 Varmint (in .308). I tried several mods with mine when I discovered the issue. Some went on without a problem, some were pulled off axis. The ones that went on ok all had a slight distance between the mod face and the start of the thread (ie slight overbore up to the thread) hence they squared up fine.
  18. Mine wasn't threaded to the shoulder though Bradders...it ended a few mm short. Needed to extend the thread and undercut properly. None of my other rifles have this issue but yes, I appreciate that it's not only Tikka that have done this, it's others as well. At least they've recognised that for mod users, it needed addressing. It is an issue with some mods depending on how their threads are cut. Many don't have any relief or undercut of their bushings. It's then that a problem occurs as obviously, the mod can be pulled off axis at the end by enough to cause a bullet strike.
  19. Using a Sinclair F-Class front bipod and no back rest for me, as I wanted to replicate loads fired in the field. Fired about 600 rounds from this barrel and it's settled in nicely but my SD/ES has started opening up from where it was with earlier loads, so need now to re-establish an accuracy node. Reasons may be lands going back a little or powder/primer batch variation, but whatever they are, my SD is now around 15 and ES has opened up considerably to close on 30, or double what they were for the same load. Brass batch is now 5 fired but careful attention to prep observed and FL sized every time.
  20. As there's not a lot of load data out there for RS powders and 6.5 Creedmoor, I thought it might be helpful to list my own comparisons here: Barrel: 24 inch; 1/8 twist; Powder: RS 62 (single base); Bullet: Lapua 139gr Scenar Brass: Lapua small primer Seating at 30 thou off lands for a COL of 2.842" Muzzle velocities (note actuals are 5 shot averages measured at 2.5m from the muzzle which I know isn't a large sample but it gives an idea). Load (gn) QL prediction Actual 41 2596 2372 41.8 2646 2473 42.6 2696 2529 43.6 2746 2608 43.9 2764 2613 There's a gulf of difference between predicted and actual. I loaded as far as 43.9 with hardly any pressure signs other than a very very slight squaring off of the primer shoulders. No case head marks, no stiff bolt, no blown primers. My own view is that actual results with the T3x barrel may be resulting in much less pressures than predicted. I can't think why there'd be such a difference. This does though reinforce the general findings that Quickload for some reason is not very reliable when using RS powders. Sometimes it goes the other way (that certainly was my findings in both .308 and .223 with RS50). However, for those wanting a roud which will stay happily above transonic to 1000 yards, 43 to 44 grains RS62 in a 24 inch 1/8 with Lapua 139 Scenars certainly seems to do the trick. I may load some more up to 44.5 and see how they go. Accuracy nodes were at: 41.4gr (2385fps) for a 0.5 inch group, vertical deflection of 0.47 inches; 42.9gr (2577fps) for a 0.64 inch group, vertical deflection of 0.58 inches; 43.9 inches (2613fps) for a 0.4 inch group, vertical deflection 0.29 inches. The above groups are very conservative as they were shot in less than ideal conditions with wind gusting to 12mph or more full, so on a still day I would expect to see those figures probably half. Pluggin in the data for that bullet at 2613fps using a G7 profile gives a 1000 yd velocity of 1402fps which is mnore than adequate to keep things nice and stable, and in theory the bullet remains above transonic to 1175 yards and supersonic to 1275 yards. I am disappointed with the velocities gained using RS62 so would be interested in what some of you may be achieving using N160 as I may switch to this and have a try to see how it compares with RS62.
  21. VarmLR

    Schmidt & Bender turret markings

    2cm per click = 10cm/100m with 5 clicks so 2 = 200m at 0.4Mrads = 8cm or 3.1 inches and 3 = 300m = 1.1Mrads. That's smack on for my 139 CM load at 2700fps or .308 using 155 smks at about 2850fps. It's starting to get a bit loopy by 400m with what looks to be about 2.4Mrad drop so this isn't some flat shooting load. It dials more like a 168 or 175gr .308 load but could be any number of alternatives.
  22. That's odd because he managed to do my 26" .223 barrel! I think that the barrel was fitted back through the headstock as Bradders suggests.
  23. I think that the issues are now resolved with newer rifles Andrew. Early production runs had a few mm of the threaded area next to the shoulder left uncut which was the problem. Newer ones now appear to be undercut by all reports. Why they ever released the Tac without the thread being properly cut in the first pace beats me, as it was always going to be a potential cause of problems for mod users.
  24. I had mine undercut and put pressure on GMK to address this is it doesn't half scare the crap out of you when pulling the trigger, and seeing impact miles to one side and high.....at 25 yds!!!! You then check your mod to see that it's b&ggered and the rounds have been clipping it on the way out. I followed this up, not satisfied that I had invalidated my warranty by doing what Tikka should have done in the first place, and to be fair to GMK, they did, shortly afterwards meet with Tikka to discuss the issue. The interim solution was to provide crush washers (which does work as the square face of the mod then has a square face of the washers to mate with so stays concentric to the barrel as the washers are stacked so that the thread effectively undercuts them). It does look as if Tikka are now properly undercutting the threads as it isn't really helpful to issue statements like "....designed for use with a muzzle break so we see no problem.". As these were intended to sell mostly in the State's, marketed for "Law enforcement and Military" but ostensibly more civilians will buy them up (when did you last see the military sporting Tikkas?). Shout loud enough for long enough, and play the safety card and someone somewhere should listen, as may have been the case here. Good job it's now sorted...and about time!
  25. VarmLR

    Tracer.

    Apparently the heads and bullets that rise to the top of the pecking order are to be referred to as "Head Bullets"
×

Important Information

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