Jump to content
brown dog

'Works in everything' N140 load for 6.5x47?

Recommended Posts

The old standard 'works in everything' 6.5x47 load was a 123 scenar over 37.5gr RL15. 

What's the equivalent 'works in everything' N140 load?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That'd be pretty anemic wouldn't it? Any idea of MV?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would have to look it up. It about 2650 from memory. 

 

Not stout out by any means but worked for me. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find 38.6 grains of RS50 works well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

N140 worked very well in my 6.5x47.

38.6g with a 123g Scenar was getting me 2930fps out of s 24" barrel. This was the max, I was seeing pressure signs at 38.8g.

i didn't like my ES/SD with CCI450s, when I switched to Muroms kvb223 magnums, I was getting single digit ES.

Accuracy was excellent all the way to 1100m. 

I'll be using N140 (trying first anyway) again in my new 6.5x47 build.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, brown dog said:

The old standard 'works in everything' 6.5x47 load

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Gandy said:

Mine worked with 35.5grns in N140.

 

3 hours ago, Gandy said:

I would have to look it up. It about 2650 from memory. 

 

Not stout out by any means but worked for me. 

I think I started at 36.0g. Surprised you stuck with such a light charge - I would push up a couple of grains, i have no doubt you'll find an equally good node with better velocity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Big Al said:

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.

Never stopped to wonder why 308 target ammo, such as FGMM, Lapua or Sako used to work in everything? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Brillo said:

I find 38.6 grains of RS50 works well.

What bullets do you use Brillo?

And your MV and barrel length?

cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Catch,

With RS50 I used 123 grain SMKs and 123 Lapua Scenars. 

With the F1 Chrony I measured MVs in the mid 2900s from a 32” Lilia 8 twist barrel. 

I started at the gold standard of 37.5 grains and worked up. 

Through real world trials I arrived at an algorithm that allows me to translate Reloder 15 data to RS50.

HTH

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, brown dog said:

Never stopped to wonder why 308 target ammo, such as FGMM, Lapua or Sako used to work in everything? 

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 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do i think buying Viht N150 was a bad idea.... Although that remains to be seen to be fair. Plenty of rounds made up, just need a day to go and try the results. I feel 140 grain, a 24" barrel, along with 2800 fps and pressure signs are going to mix well...:unsure:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Big Al said:

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 

Al, you might be showing a wee bit of inexperience here. In the days when most were using 308 for sniping and tactical comps, it was generally recognised that, for example, FGMM, would deliver 0.5moa or better in any accurate rifle. As would Lapua factory. They were/are an ammo universal 'sweet spot' that people struggle to explain.  In 6.5x47, 37.5gr of rl15 behind a 123 scenar was another inexplicable ammo sweet spot.  That you haven't experience of that doesn't mean that the same is true of others :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

40.5 grains of RS 60 behind a 136 grain Scenar "L" does it for me. 2940fps from a 30" 8 twist barrel.

Still doing 1200fps at 1200yds, according to Litz, and has done well at this distance.

Start 10% lower and work up, usual caveats apply.

RePete

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, brown dog said:

Al, you might be showing a wee bit of inexperience here. In the days when most were using 308 for sniping and tactical comps, it was generally recognised that, for example, FGMM, would deliver 0.5moa or better in any accurate rifle. As would Lapua factory. They were/are an ammo universal 'sweet spot' that people struggle to explain.  In 6.5x47, 37.5gr of rl15 behind a 123 scenar was another inexplicable ammo sweet spot.  That you haven't experience of that doesn't mean that the same is true of others :)

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

59f846ba6ee38_ScreenShot2017-10-31at09_27_20.png.53accf3a324f3e123cca21926170faf6.png

59f8469d52344_ScreenShot2017-10-31at09_23_27.png.84cad66bdeb6dd2a150d2097fe1a225e.png

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 :)

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've never had those problems - if you saw how I reload, you'd understand why - let's just say that I think a lot of these 'problems' are over thunk :D

Eg: last time I had a new 6.5x47 rifle, and having never fired it: In a car at the back of the range I bunged in 37.5gr RL15, did OAL by holding the round up to the light next to the rounds Elwood was using, and seating until the two rounds were visually the same, and then cranking out a bunch that were identical to that.  And then lying down with a carefully boresighted rifle, firing two sighters (ie zeroing) and then shooting a McQueens HPS in competition at 300.  I'll admit, Elwood was weeping as I did it; first at my underthunk reloading approach, and then at the fact it worked.

All your points acknowledged, now, with all the 'it's too complicated' explain to me why manufacturers are able to offer successful sniping and target loads. :)

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, brown dog said:

I've never had those problems - if you saw how I reload, you'd understand why - let's just say that I think a lot of these 'problems' are over thunk :D

Eg: last time I had a new 6.5x47 rifle, and having never fired it: In a car at the back of the range I bunged in 37.5gr RL15, did OAL by holding the round up to the light next to the rounds Elwood was using, and seating until the two rounds were visually the same, and then cranking out a bunch that were identical to that.  And then lying down with a carefully boresighted rifle, firing two sighters (ie zeroing) and then shooting a McQueens HPS in competition at 300.  I'll admit, Elwood was weeping as I did it; first at my underthunk reloading approach, and then at the fact it worked.

All your points acknowledged, now, with all the 'it's too complicated' explain to me why manufacturers are able to offer successful sniping and target loads. :)

 

 

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. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Al, I suppose we're chasing different levels of precision. Anything at 0.3-0.4moa, and I'm a happy camper.

 If I went out and bought some 6.5x47 Lapua factory ammo, I'd be surprised if it didn't do 0.3  in any decent rifle. No OAL tweaking, no powder changes, it just would. Factory ammo straight put of the box.

Same same, if I shot every AW in a rack of 20 with Lapua 308 target ammo, I'd be almost certain that every rifle would return 0.3moa or better. No ammo tuning, just straight out of the box.

But I've always been a 'horses' not 'zebras' person and I find that more of this is a mind game than people care to acknowledge. Now, I'll admit that I have no benchrest experience, but I do have a pretty strong background in the science and application of really accurate, really long range fire, and when I hear an anecdote like yours; three supposedly identical barrels, in three supposedly identical rifles with identical components and one being different, I don't hear 'magical internal ballistic unknowns' that require charge and OAL tinkering, I hear either a head game of someone looking for difference and operating a psychological self-fulfilling prophesy, or an unrecognised inconsistency that, if identified, would account for the performance change. 

Regardless, the simple fact is that target loads are manufactured and sold that operate successfully across broad ranges of quality rifles.  So, asking for a sweet spot 'works in most' load is no different to asking for, say, the FGMM recipe in 308 - which many of us used to do - as we did with the Lapua 155 scenar target load.

I have absolutely no doubt that there'll be an N140 load that'll have the 6.5x47 approximating Lapua's commercial any-rifle target load. And I'm pretty sure that, psychologically, because I expect to find it, I will :)

Now. Does anyone have any such N140/123scenar load that they and their pals find seems to work in anything?

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

37.5 g 140 worked with 123 scenar in my (now gone) AI AX

 

Acceptable accuracy - .3s

MV was 2800

 

CCI BR primers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

140 , Rel 15 , and Varget are so similar Matt, I've always used the same data for bullet weight , in anything suitable for those powders.

To be on the safe side work a grain lower, though I know from experience that 140 won't spike like rel 15 can.

140 is very stable, batch to batch, unlike rel 15. When I used rel 15, I used to buy five tubs at once, and pour them all into a bowl and mix them, then put them back in the tubs. That levelled them up a bit.

My pet load is the same as yours, but with Varget. It works in the 6.5's I build, and a good benchmark to test a gun with. I don't load develop them further, simply don't get the time. The bullet being a lapua scenar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, brown dog said:

Thanks, Andy! :)

Just work up to that - from 5-10% less...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


BHTargets200.jpg

Lumensmini.png

CALTON MOOR RANGE (2) (200x135).jpg

bradley1 200.jpg

NVstore200.jpg

Danny Trowsdale 200.png

safeshot 200.jpg

tacfire 200.jpg

blackrifle.png

jr_firearms_200.gif

valkyrie 200.jpg

RifleMags_200x100.jpg

border_ballistics_UKV_ad.jpg

dolphin button4 (200x100).jpg

CASEPREP_FINAL_YELLOW_hi_res__200_.jpg

rovicom200.jpg

tab 200.jpg



×

Important Information

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