VarmLR

Hi Laurie

excellent post, and yes, what you surmised I meant was indeed what I meant.  It would be interesting to see how various other FL size dies compare.  I check my fire-formed using a Hornady comparitor, then set the press up so that I get about 1.5 to 2 thou', no more.  This on my Lee dies seems to equate somewhere around shell holder just touching the bottom of the die plus no more than 1/8th turn and not the 1/4 Lee suggest which bumps back a smidgen too far.   It will vary depending on manufacturing tolerances and this isn't surprising when you consider just how many dies are churned out from the same machinery which must be regularly checked to ensure it's within acceptable tolerances. 

I like your methodology Andrew and have resorted to much the same thing now.   More time practising and in the field for me has allowed real gains to be made in judging shots and shooting with more confidence.  If a load shoots moa at 600 yds, for most purposes that's fine with me.  If it doesn't it's more likely my loads are way out or I'm doing something wrong.  Either way, FL sizing and being consistent with brass prep/loading is usually good enough to get me into moa at these distances.  The rest is down to me.  Having fun ringing steel in less than perfect conditions over long distances is good practice and good fun...beats fretting over group sizes!

You could, in some circumstances, expect a heating barrel and fast strings to have increased dispersion, especially with a light hunting profile barrel that heats up fast, the opposite of what you are experiencing here.  Slower shots resulting in horizontal stringing, as Ronin suggests above, might usually signify more a technique issue.  If it were a scope or mount issue (and I'm not saying it isn't) then I'd expect the same irrespective of grouping string timings.  The low vertical dispersion of the horizontal string might point towards a good consistent load but the horizonal string I've only seen before like that due to two or three things: Shooter technique inconsistency, wind, or the action mounting screws needing torquing up a little.  Of course, if this is happening consistently in spite of who is behind the rifle then it could also point to a barrel issue.  All you can do is start with the easy to check things first and work your way through the list of possible causes until you identify the most likely.

I've tried the 60gr Vmax and despite achieving some consistently low ES figures using N133 and N140 I cannot achieve consistent accuracy with that bullet.  My barrel, whatever I seem to do, only manages about 1/2 moa with it on average. I have better luck with the 69TMK which works out closer to 1/3 moa on average.  I may try the 55 VMax instead and see how that goes.

Strictly speaking, there is no such thing as a truly consistent method if one gets pedantic about things.  The brass will migrate from head to mouth whichever method is used, so the case internal to external dimensions will alter very slightly shot to shot along the length of the case.   My own view, and I don't claim it's the right view, is that consistent neck tension and headspace is more important to my shooting than other considerations, along with consistency in internal volumes (again, within reason).  I used to neck size and tried collet neck sizers such as the lee one, which was fine with my .223 for a fair few reloads without the need to FLS but with my larger cals, I ended  up bumping the shoulders back every 3 to 4 reloads anyway, so reverted to FL sizing everything.  I few trips out after deer where the round refused to chamber ofter just a couple of hottish reloads in.308 convinced me to just stick with full length and I have noticed little, if any real difference in my SD/ES if being honest.  I start with decent brass, anneal every firing, FL size, check that headspace is no greater than 3 thou of the fire formed cases for the shoulder to chamber seating, and haven't worried about it beyond that.  Comp shooters may wish to do more.  The average Joe like myself probably doesn't need to worry beyond this.  There can be a tendency to over think these things and forget to concentrate on shooting technique, load consistency, including checking batch to batch powder variations and tweaking loads accordingly.

I anneal and FL size everything.  No missed chances in the field where the shoulders ought to have been bumped back, and for consistency.  Others do things differently.  There's many flavours to choose from!

Been out of things ill for months so just seen this thread.

My "go to" load for CM is 44gr RS62 under a 139 Scenar/SRP brass and this results in bang on 2700fps@20 degreesC for me and from data others have supplied, closer to 42.5 to 43gr RS62 using LRP brass seems to average 2750fps to 2800fps or thereabouts (don't use the 44gr load as for the SRP brass!).  Tikka Tac A1/24inch barrel/lapua SRP Brass/Murom KVB223-M primers/RS62/139Scenar

I'd echo that.  N133 was better in my rifle too with this weight.  Around 23.5gr seems to work well.

I've had a few Hawke scopes.  Some have been ok...most have not.  Glass has been generally poor.  I wouldn't touch another one with a barge-pole but each to their own.  What put me right off them was owning, for a short time, one of their premium range a few years ago (4 or 5 years ago) and finding that the turrets had been shimmed with offcuts of the thin aluminium index marking washers used under the covers.  This was on a brand new scope!  It wouldn't dial consistently, nor would other ones I've had, so I personally would look elsewhere.  You can only speak as you find, and if you've found a later model to be ok...fair enough.

If you look at a Nightforce used, I'd advise not looking at the SHV when you can still pick up a (better) NSX.  Few scopes offer the same build and optical quality for the price as a decen used NSX, although you will find brighter glass (not always an indicator of quality).  I wouldn't swap my NSX on my hunting rifle for anything else.

The curve ball not yet mentioned and probably THE best VFM used are the Bushnell DMR 34mm tubed scopes.  Simply awesome performance for around £450 to £650 on the used market.

HPS Target Rifles in Lydney can supply barrels and completed rifles for export so am sure would be able to rebarrel for export too.  You can contact them via their website: https://www.hps-tr.com/en/

On 10/27/2019 at 9:56 AM, Popsbengo said:

100% agree.  statistical phantoms

I have a difference of opinion, at least where OCW is concerned.  It reaches the same end point as your QL optimum barrel time method in as much as it finds the optimum harmonic node for your barrel.  Whatever method you choose will be open to the variability of temperature change as the temperature doesn't care what method you choose!

OCW in theory should work and it has obviously worked for baldie but it won't for everyone.   I think it requires far more batch consistency than most are willing to admit wanting to prepare.

It's perfect for load development and some fun shooting Dave.  It's nice once in a  while just to have fun and forget the obsessive compulsive disorders we all share over reloading!  It's also a great opportunity to chew the cud with some really decent people, share experiences and compete for fun in everything from service rifle, to underlever and "tightest group" comps. What's not to like?  You could argue, it's every bit as useful for honing skills when shooting for vermin control as if honest, a vast majority of us shoot vermin inside of 300 yards.  For those whose sole purpose for shooting is competition at extended ranges, then it still offers useful load development time.

After trying the Satterlee method several times for my .223 with similar results (not the same but similar) they didn't replicate the nodes found using OCW that well so I can only conclude that even if you could get consistency into the method and take great care, OCW seems more reliable at determining where barrel harmonics are at wrt to nodes, then ES/SD can be examined for various nodes to pick a load.  More economical for me than the ladder method given I shoot 5 shot strings for each load. 

I'd be delighted with 1/2 moa at 1000 yds...in fact 3/4 moa would be great with a factory rifle at that distance!  1/3 moa at 100 yds even with laser guided bullets is a big ask 😄

Late to the party but it seems to me that you need to try alternative rings if:

1) your scope tests ok and 

2) you're sure there's no "fitting error" (again....just saying)

Jcampbellsmith made a good suggestion.  Try the rings that he suggested as they offer compensating adjustment in both vertical and horizontal planes and don't need any special moa raising rail to extend range considerably via the clever ring insert system.  Not cheap but superb rings.

I use them on my TAC A1 with a PM2 and have the set up almost perfect for mechanical zero (within a few clicks).  You have to take your time with setting up...even slight variations in how you torque the bolts can affect things.

Also, if not already done, have your "problem" rings honed.  You can purchase machined rods and use engineer's blue or some other method the hone the rings if needed or have a gunsmith do this for you.  Could be something as simple as that.

There is a final point that you oughtn't overlook. When calculating available thresholds for adjustment, it's wise not to count the whole number of clicks as being available.  Discount the last 3 to 5 because often this is where you can have some binding on turrets that can lead to discrepancies between adjustments.  So if you have 93 clicks from centre to each side, count on using only 88 to 90.  It's not a good thing to wind any scope all the way out...a bit of mechanical sympathy is a good thing!

Could be that the shoulder area within the chamber simply hasn't been cleaned properly and you have a build up of crud or perhaps some corrosion present. If not already done, can you have it bore-scoped to see? I would with any used barrel, preferably before buying one!  You can buy modest little cameras these days that attach to your phone.  Whilst not great, they should be good enough to check the chamber for anything obvious.  Give the chamber a thorough clean if not already done and see what it's like after.

This is terrible news.  Rogiet Moor has been one of my favourite 600m ranges for a long time now and to have this happen affects a lot of people at Offas Dyke where this was one of the firm favourites.  I get the feeling that the military don't want civilians using their ranges.  It won't affect Severn-side as that is a completely different range, and thankfully not in MOD hands.  It's a private range.

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.

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.

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.

 

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).

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.

I will follow with interest.  I had Ramshot Hunter on my radar as well as Norma 204.  I'll stick with RS62 until more data comes out for the others, as our spell of hot weather is coming to a close.  Sounds like the Ramshot might meter well in one of my comp' powder throwers...

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.

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?

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.