Jump to content
UKV - The Place for Precision Rifle Enthusiasts


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by VarmLR

  1. VarmLR

    6.5 re-barrel options

    As the others have said, as you have the dies etc for a 47, that's the one I'd stick with. If starting from scratch, the CM has a little more versatility with bullet weights. I'm not sure what the match guys' experience is with accuracy comparisons between the two (has any direct testing been done by anyone?) but I'd be surprised if there were anything in it. The whole point of CM development was to produce an inherently accurate and efficient case design, and it does seem to deliver good results. I've been following the debate on 6.5 cal bullet weights and looking at one of the more popular bullets, the Scenar, which weight is best I think may be down to the barrel length. Longer barrels may suit the heavier slightly higher BC bullet better where it can max on velocities. I'm about to try the 123gr variant as I think that the difference in BC may be eclipsed in my 24" barrel with the higher velocities that I ought to be able to run with the 123gr over the 139...we'll see. Common consensus from those who have tried it suggests that there's very little advantage to the 139 over the 123.
  2. VarmLR


    Yes, they're perfect. Nice quality. You ought to get 10 or so reloads from those, perhaps a few more, before primer pockets start to loosen up. Best to anneal them every 3 or 4 firings if you can (just the necks).
  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

    6.5CM/RS62 Updates

    All mine are loaded 30 thou off and there is a fairly large sweet spot between 43.7 and 44.2gr where ES is lowest, so your results pretty much mirror my own findngs.
  5. VarmLR

    6.5CM/RS62 Updates

    First shot POI was very close. The barrel has gained some velocity with bedding in which is no big surprise. Temperature likely counts for most of the observed velocity gains the other day. Bullets were kept in the shade where ambient temp was about 22 degrees. I am not really trying to achieve anything....just noting and sharing outputs from SR brass loads for comparison with LR brass. Velocities are on the nail for the purposes but not being reached as efficiently as for LR brass loads which I will be returning to and sticking with when this brass batch is done. For the moment, accuracy is very good, the app has been calibrated with observed shot data over a wide temperature and distance range so the app data for the bullet is now on the nail.
  6. 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.
  7. VarmLR

    rebarrel time

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

    Rebarrel from 223 to 204

    I was being polite. Take your personal comments elsewhere.
  9. 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.
  10. 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.
  11. VarmLR

    Font Colour

    Loads better.
  12. VarmLR

    Font Colour

    That as well.....LoL.... You know you're getting old when you can't remember Pink Floyd track names.
  13. 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.
  14. 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.
  15. VarmLR

    Font Colour

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

    George Balfour

    RIP George. You will be fondly remembered.
  17. No. Didn't fancy paying those prices. The TMK works well for me.
  18. 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.
  19. 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.
  20. I shot both 190 smk and 175 TMK from my 1/11 twist 24 inch tube using RS single base RS50. Loaded to 2.800 OAL. Velocities for both were circa 2600fps and 1000 yard performance was very good indeed, with my best 20 shot group from a factory rifle being moa. You mention 1/2 moa....at what range and what was the group size? 100 yard groups tell you nothing about 1000yd performance. You need to tune for low ES and low SD. I found the venerable old 190 smk to be a good bullet and does allow the .308 to be a genuine 1000 yard proposition. Ditto the TMK. There's better about but they're considerably more expensive to shoot. Your 208grn should be plenty good enough if by "good enough" you mean long range practice and fun but you may find the 175 TMK well worth a look and should be able to achieve respectable velocities from your barrel with that bullet. There's little point comparing a .308 to any 6.5....if you want a 6.5, buy a 6.5 or a 7mm for the BC advantage. I shoot both cals using factory rifles and tbh, do almost as well with the .308 as I do with the 6.5 because when conditions are challenging, it's the ability to call the wind, thermal effects and other variations, some which may be peculiar to each range that matter so unless you're already a seasoned and experienced long range shot, the .308 is a great calibre to practice and learn from, precisely as it show cases variations slightly more than 6.5 cals. Practice with a .308 is also cheaper.
  21. VarmLR

    6.5 Creedmoor v 6.5 Swede

    Swede using modern Scan loadings can match or exceed CM velocities and makes for an excellent long range rifle for target or plinking. Brass is generally cheaper. CM as previous posters point out benefits from short action and ability to load bullets closer to lands and stay within mag length. With SR primers, CM can also be loaded quite hot (in theory up to 62K psi) but I've found that velocities have been lower for equivalents loads between LR and SR brass. CM also benefits from a steeper shoulder angle, so say improving concentricity and hence accuracy potential. It probably can't be loaded just quite to the same MVs as is possible with 6.5 x 55 but is is a relatively efficient cartridge. As above, most 6.5's are pretty much on a par, with most of us mortal shootists probably not able to discern or gain much more benefit from one over another in terms of accuracy.
  22. 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.
  23. I FL resize all my brass (using Redding dies) as I see no benefit in neck sizing and only issues on the horizon as they'll eventually need FL resized anyway. I anneal each firing and try to keep things as consistent load to load as I can. I also use a Lee factory crimp die but only to give a very slight crimp to try and uniform neck tension for each round. I have found differences between several batches of muroms I used, more with SR standard which I no longer use. For 6.5CM I use either KVB-223M or CCI-450 (being tried for my next batch to see if there is any improvement in MVs and SDs over the KVB-M primers).
  24. VarmLR

    swiss reload, velocity consistency, primers

    I've been using RS50 in mine with 175 TMKs and Lapua brass with Murom primers, and achieving good SD and low ES. Try using OCW or Satterlee load development as it helps identify your lowest SD loadings with better precision and efficiency than ladder testing. Neck tension needs to be consistent, but unlike smaller cals such as 223 I have found no need to brass batch to achieve low SD or the use of any fancy dies with my .308 as once a node is found, it tends to be reasonably pressure insensitive to a .5gr spread. I use a Lee FL die, a Lee factory crimp die and I anneal every single firing. I simply load to mag length and seldom bother chasing the lands as there's little need with the bullet designs that I use.
  25. VarmLR

    New Tactical Tikka

    I agree with you there...it's a bug bear of mine too. I bought and fitted one of those squash-bal type over bolt handles on my T3 and may to the same with the Tic Tac (love the name!) as I find it helps and makes the bolt nicer to cycle.

Important Information

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