Jump to content
UKV - The Place for Precision Rifle Enthusiasts

VarmLR

Members
  • Content count

    1,537
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by VarmLR


  1. Everything is replaced back into their respective storage areas, the workstation cleaned and powder returned to the tubs and placed in secure storage.  Never ever leave any powder out.  1) you may forget what powder is in there, 2) as mentioned, powder will absorb moisture from atmosphere and besides anything else, it's a hell of a fire risk.


  2. On 8/31/2019 at 6:25 PM, Mosskat55 said:

    Incurable does not necessarily mean a soon goodbye. I pray that your illness can be managed and that you can enjoy a full and happy life. God bless.

     

    Many thanks. I don't wish to de-rail this thread, but presently I don't know the prognosis...early days for me...could be a few years or a lot longer.  Many thanks for your wishes.

     


  3. 4 hours ago, terryh said:

    Martin,

    There is nothing wrong with factory ammo (or rifles come to that) these days, sometimes I wonder if reloading is actually worth it - but it is therapeutic and necessary in some cases.

    Here is a group recently shot with a friends factory Tikka tac21 in 6.5 Creedmore using Factory Hornady ammo, distance 285 yards.

    1752649470_target1.thumb.jpeg.85716c3421995022df5d082df632a4de.jpeg

     

    Find the factory ammo that works and buy 500 and put together the kit to reload in the mean time, you've then 500 brass to start with.

    Brgds

    T

    ps - Caveat - I think cocaine is actually cheaper than shooting 🤣 

     

    +1....with expensive bells on .

    Just tell your wife that running a 6.5CM for a year is way cheaper than a set of golf sticks plus a year's club membership (at a posh golf club) including the bar bill of course (just omit that bit).  It's pretty much the truth.  The capital outlay for rife and optics will obviously be the biggest outlay.  Buy decent glass and it will hold its value well and will serve you well (so you're likely to get a fair wedge back come sale time).  A 6.5 like say the TAC-A1 plus decent glass won't give much change out of £3.5K.

    My ammo costs on reloading work out at about 65p/round so 1500 would be £975 annually if just for the 6.5.  Rifle club membership is peanuts by comparison even with range fees.

    If you allowed £1200 to £1300 annually that's probably cover all bases when set up with reloading.

    Factory ammo at £25/20 works out at £1875 for comparison, and if (as one poster above does) you get it from the range at £17/20 that's  £1275 so similar to reloading but without the hobby aspect or custom load development aspects (which may or may not be needed depending on whether your rifle likes it).

     


  4. RIP Mark...this is so sad.  He was a stoic man and an inspiration to others as he put things in perspective in his own unique way!

    I have, today, been diagnosed with an incurable illness.  I just hope that I can take a leaf from Marks book although in my case, there is some hope.


  5. I use RS50 which I find betters N140 in that it doesn't appear to give the same pressure spikes when a little hot and appears to give higher velocities despite being almost the same in terms of energy.  I've found that you can safely substitute N140 loads direct to RS50, but I have loaded up RS50 a little higher without the pressure signs I got from N140.  It's now my go-to powder for the .308 and the heavy .223 bullets over 70gr.


  6. I'm a bit late to the party here but after I use up my current batch of RS62, I'd like to move to another powder.  Temp sensitivity is one reason but so is the very non-uniform grain size which makes accurate metering a pain compared with handling say N133 for the .223.

    I was going to try either Norma's 204 (double base) not pushed too hot to avoid accelerated throat erosion.  Does anyone know if this is as hot as say RS52 or N550?  Any updates from those who've tried Loxex powders too?


  7. Must admit, I just use the .025" cup thickness primers now in .223.  Some find the CCI 400s fine, with no issues, others seem to have issues so it's likely a combination of factors including loads used and firing pin design.  My .223 firing pin seems to leave a crater-like mark (even with low pressure loads) rather than the clean dent of my Tikka rifles and is definitely a little harder on the primers.  As Laurie says, batch variations and higher loads (not over pressure, just near the higher end) are reason enough to pick the .025 imho.


  8. This has nothing to do with the OP's question as he clearly is not shooting high pressure loads.  You assume far too much.  My loads were not at all "high pressure" as in close to or over max SAAMI either and yes, I know the value of decent brass.  My Sako and Lapua brass are easily into double figure loadings but PPU is just not as durable.  You can stipulate that any deformation is pressure related and you don't have to be a genius to come to that conclusion, but loading comparative loads in various types of brass will always yield some that is more claimable and less able to obtain anything like the number of repeat loadings of others.  I detect a personal barb in your comments which is completely unnecessary, and if that was your intention, then it has no place on this thread.  


  9. A good niche for it is as a novelty paperweight imho.  I had one for 5 years and had quite a few safety issues with ammo, very variable ammo quality.  When I could get ammo, every batch and sometimes every box would shoot differently meaning constant re-zeroing and then about 5 in every box would have split necks with at least one or two squib rounds.  I had enough of it and got shot.  When I could get decent ammo, it shot into about an inch at 100 yds on a good day (16 inch barrel) and at 200yds wasn't near accurate enough if there was more than a puff of wind.  Great for bunny bashing to 150 yds, not much good for anything else imho.  The 22LR and 223 do everything I need for vermin control between them.  I'd like a little 17 hornet at some point as that would be a far better choice than the HMR.  That one's doomed for obscurity.  Even the ammo isn't that cheap any more. (ok still cheaper than CF but when you consider the re-zeroing with each batch of rounds, you waste 5 or 10 rounds per box so here locally at £17/50 you end up really paying £17/40 and I can almost home load cheap 223 rounds for that!)


  10. All I do with new Lapua brass is partially pass them through a sizing die to run the necks over the expander mandrel, chamfer the case mouth, load then pass the rounds through a lee factory crimp die set for a very light crimp to ensure uniformity of neck tension and shoot. I gave up FL sizing it (as I do with some other brass) because comparisons with FL sized/virgin brass showed no difference in results.  I occasionally have to use the flash hole de-burring tool but Laurie is right, by and large, Lapua brass is so good from the factory these days, you'll rarely need to (unlike some other makes).  I have a primer pocket uniforming tool but figure why use it when Lapua have made each primer pocket near identical in the first place!  


  11. I like Redding dies personally.  Quality for even the entry level ones plus the relatively simple design and decent finish, and (measured) precision put them a class above some of the entry level competition for not much more money.  Their seating die with vld micrometer insert is a gem and the vld insert I've found a must for most CM bullets I now use.  For other bits and pieces like the case holders for my trimmer, Wilson stuff takes some beating.


  12. On 6/12/2019 at 11:41 AM, MrCetirizine said:

    This was nowhere near maximum load. It was 23.5gr N140 with a 77gr SMK 40thou off the lands. I can run 24.7gr with no pressure signs (usually) but as stated, it's not worth pushing faster when 23.5gr works at the distances I shoot.

    Just so...it doesn't stop some jumping to conclusions though  😉


  13. On 6/12/2019 at 8:14 AM, Chanonry said:

    a simpler view would be to avoid over pressurising your components

    Or to use the correct primer to start with.  I am not and have NOT mentioned anything about loading over-pressure components so bat that one firmly back into your court.  I stand by my comments 😉

    I happen to agree though that there is a tendency for following fashionable high speed loadings.  That though clearly isn't the case here.  Accuracy nodes can be found a reasonable way under max safe pressures (or at least there's usually an accuracy node at more moderate pressures). 


  14. Thanks for the heads-up. I'll check out whether they have any data for some I use.

     

    Edit.  Just done that and it's spot on wrt to my own data for the 139 scenar at both 600 and 1000yds  That's a handy reference resource.👍


  15. 7 hours ago, MrCetirizine said:

    They were CCI small rifle primers. Not the BR ones.

    There's your issue. Well, that and possibly loose primer pockets as some brass in 223 I've found wont reload past 5 reloads (eg PPU) with stiff loads. You really do need to use 0.025" cup thickness primers with the chamber pressures in 223 or what happens especially with cheap brass like PPU, is the very slight case head bowing with each firing results in loose primer pockets after about 5 to 6 reloads and you get the primer blow back, with gas escape at the side and often a badly cratered or pierced primer.  Sometimes you can get away with standard CCI200 primers on fresh brass but why take the risk as getting a bolt or firing pin damaged can prove an expensive repair? One blown primer wont usually damage the firing pin or bolt face but repeated blow-throughs will, and you may not notice the slight sooty tell tale signs around the primer if it isn't pierced and only start to notice when you see pitting of the bolt face and then check your case heads closely.

    You'll be fine on CCI250 or KVB223-M or Remmy 7.5 or any BR primer (loads need to be reworked up obviously).


  16. Anneal the brass after each shooting if you want consistency in neck tension...it takes seconds with a half decent set up and prolongs brass life to boot.  Check out lupos annealing machines (advertises on UKV).

    FL sizing though is what I default to every time.  I'm still on the same brass batch and am up to 6 reloads without yet needing to trim the brass let alone change it!  Use SRP for slightly longer case life.  O/W you really need to anneal the necks.


  17. On 6/6/2019 at 10:04 PM, PhilM said:

    Custom Drag Models are the way forward really for long range shooting, especially when shooting through transonic and beyond - available in lots of of AB products such as Kestrels etc.

    If you’re not shooting ELR however G1/G7s suit most people well. 

    Ive always had good success using G1 advertised BCs with G1 models in calculators out to 800m or so, and that’s with boat tailed bullets, I guess the flight profile of the boat tailed bullet will always match the G7 better, but the G1 won’t be too far off. But either are trying to “best fit” the projectile against a modelled curve, where a Doppler radar gathered custom curve (CDM) will always be better at long ranges.

    Spot on Phil.

    At least where first shot on target counts.  Usually (an I include myself here) most people tend to use the apps with approximations for BC/MV to get on target, then dial in after shooting a series of groups or test shots.  You can take that approach (and why not...it's valid?) for fun shooting, but it's a waste of time for LR vermin control (they don't stand still once a bullet thumps in several feet away) and for comp, you sometimes get very limited...or no calibration shots depending on comp and discipline.  Custom drag models are by miles the best way.

    AFAIK, Lapua are the only company currently offering limited custom drag modelling for their bullets, but it's now the defacto mainstay for military sniper training (at least in the USA).

    I have to say though I'm surprised to learn that you get "good success" out to 800m using G1 on a stated MV for boat tail bullets.  I've tried many times and its been no-where near (acceptably) close.  G7 seems to model way better once out past 300yds IME.


  18. Truth is even more confusing.  Simply put, BC's...all of them, are only approximations which attempt to describe the form factor and drag factor of a projectile at a given velocity.  It is also velocity dependant which wrt to trajectory is in itself affected by air density, temperature etc etc (not that these matter at relatively short hunting ranges but they certainly do when you get into long range).  The bible on these things is Brian Litz's "Advanced Ballistics for Long Range Shooting" wherein you'll find all the theory (and maths!) behind this subject.  If you retain just 5% of that book, you'll be doing well!

    G1 was initialised to try and predict the trajectory of early ball ammo and basic flat based pointed tip military (black powder) and is based upon that early military bullet form.  G7 is based upon a more streamlined form of spire-point with boat tail which in itself has many variables including length of tip, CoG, angle of boat-tail and length of bullet wall.

    It follows that the published figures are either presented in one of two ways:  a G1 or G7 at the stated MV (cheating), or an averaged figure based upon hunting or target distances.  

    Some manufacturers use the former but enter it into a Ballistic App and it will provide over optimistic results for drop and drift.  BC sells, it's as simple as that, and that is why so many are happy just to print optimistic G1 figures at MV on the box, which is about as useful as telling you your car has brakes but I've no idea how long it will take you to stop from 60mph!

    Sierra almost always quote an averaged G7 figure these days for their boat tailed ammo and by and large, their figures equate well with Doppler radar evaluations at different ranges, with comparisons notably done and published by Brian Litz.

    However (isn't there always one?) don't get too hung up on it, as despite what's published every rifle may shoot slightly differently (barrel twist, wear and length as well as chambering all affect the MV) so even averaged G7 won't always give you the required precision based on a stated MV (which most likely won't be your MV).  The only reliable way to calibrate your app is to beg, borrow or buy a chronograph to determine your MV and test your drops from a 100yd zero.  What you'll probably find is that quoted G1 works well for even boat tailed projectiles out to perhaps 300yds but once beyond that, drag and velocity loss really start to matter wrt form, bullet attitude (not the cheeky kind, the geometric kind!) and the effects of wind really start to kick in.  From there out, averaged G7 will provide a reasonable fit but usually not a precise fit.  To get something more reliable, you really need to measure drop (5 shot average group at each target looking for group centre) at 100yd intervals out beyond your intended range (to get a full understanding of trajectory to and beyond your intended target), using your 100yd zero and leaving the scope settings alone....well, nearly as there's a problem with that...

    The switched-on will spot the obvious issues when needing to do this out past say 300yds.  Drop and drift (even without wind) may exceed practical target boundaries (well, elevation will anyway).  The answer is to re-zero for the 300yd target and measure drop out to say 600.  For hunting/vermin control, you really probably don't need to go any further and even if you only have the land to get say data to 400 yds it may be enough to help you out.

    Choosing an app that allows a starting point whereby you input the stated (average) G7BC, then use tested drop and drift data out to your max tested range and see how that correlates to the app predictions.  You can then in Strelok Pro for one,  alter the BC "actual value" until the app gives you the same or near as damn-it drops.  Whilst you can also alter the MV figure to get a fudged fit, technically an averages BC is better practice imho.  Job done and it should be spot on for your newly developed loads.

    This though is just the start.  If you intend regularly, or not so regularly shooting beyond 400 yds with any sort of precision, you'll almost certainly be tripped up unless you also calibrate your app with powder temperature sensitivity and with differing environmental data.  At least for on-target first-shot.  I've been shooting LR for many years now and have come to realise that the more I learn about it, the more I realise I don't know!  That and there's a requirement for fastidious discipline and consistency in home loading to ensure consistency which comes from the right load, and low ES (a must for LR shooting).


  19. Hawke make a cracker in that price bracket at just under £650.  Endurance ED 20-60x85.  Compared one to some  Nikons, opticrons and a few others at similar money, it surprised me with just how good it was.  Resolution at 50x was superb.

    Better still are secondhand Kowa scopes.  For about £700 to £800 used, you'll get a cracking good optic from them, much beloved amongst bird watchers.  I used to own a Kowa medium format camera.  Could kick myself for ever selling it...simply superb optics.  


  20. ?????  Under what logic do you get to a 30mm autocannon from a 7mm?  Good grief man!

    That is not the argument I made....in fact I didn't think I was making any argument, just stating the obvious.  Serious target comp shooters have migrated to 7mm from 6,5 for 1000yds due to the blindingly obvious BC advantages of doing so.  If serious comp isn't the aim, then I was recommending the 6.5CM....up until baldie lobbed in the excellent suggestion of the 6.5 x 55 improved.

     


  21. I think that we have rather a different take on LR shooting of animals.  With the exception of vermin species, few here shoot any animals at extended ranges.  For vermin like carrion crow or fox or rabbit,  extended ranges to 600 yds may not be seen as that unusual  depending on local geography and the ability of the shot(using frangible highly effective vermin control bullets which you wouldn't use for deer).  However, very few here take medium or large game (the largest being lowland Reds) at more than 300 to 400yds, and then only because on certain areas it might be impossible to stalk closer due to terrain etc.  Most are probably taken at within 300 yds (hill) and within 100yds (woodland or mixed open lowland).  My reason for never EVER taking a shot over 250 yds on deer is because the smaller species that I stalk don't stand still for long and it only takes a fraction of a second's movement to go from an engine room shot to a ruptured gut/spoiled carcass and unnecessary suffering if it drags itself off before a follow up shot ensues.  Part of the skill is the stalk so mostly I like to get within 100 yds or ambush stalk within that distance.

     At 800yds, I'd imagine a second or more allows a lot of room for error between the trigger being pulled and the animal being struck, and that's if a shooter is even capable of half moa at that distance in varied environmental conditions.  It just doesn't seem ethical to me but there we go, it takes all sorts and I'm not here to judge what anyone else does.


  22. The other deceptive thing when reading comparative case capacities of the 260 V's Creed' is that with high BC 140gr bullets, the 260 has little to no advantage in effective charge volume because the bullet has to sit deeper into the case negating any paper advantage it might have with lighter, shorter bullets.  I hadn't considered the improved L/A 6.5 x 55 baldie...that's quite a good shout if it (as you rightly point out) hadn't been for the 7mm taking over.

×

Important Information

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