VarmLR

I refrained from doing so as I was finding loads started compressing quite hard at 44.6 grains so didn't venture above that (seated 30 thou off the lands so a COAL of 2.842"). On new brass, that gave MVs of 2660 fps, about 40fps under the next known harmonic for a 24 inch barrel. Fire formed plus KVB Magnum primers should get part of the way there and my guess is that 44.6 will be about as high as you might want to go with small primer brass/RS62. I may load one or two just to try it. It should result in a load capable of low ES and a velocity around the 2700 fps mark but I was starting to get some bolt marks on the brass at 44.6 so won't go there, especially as this is a winter load development and I don't yet have the same handle on temperature sensitivity of RS62 as I do with the Viht powders. It was certainly noticeable that as I shot up the load scale on the OCW test, that the hotter velocities for each increment always lay towards the end where the last shots were taken. To explain: Starting at the lower loads, one shot is fired then the next shot is fired at the next load increment up and so-on until the highest load is reached. The barrel was left to cool for 5 minutes, then I shot from the highest to the lowest, another 5 min break, before shooting back up the scale again. In every case, as the barrel and chamber temperatures rose, so did respective velocities, hence going low to high and back, I hoped to even out the discrepancies that would otherwise occur. The results of the OCW testing are presented here with a discussion below them: A) 139 Lap Scenar/Lap small primer brass/Murom KVB Magnum small rifle primers/COAL 1.842" Load (gr) MV (fps) ES Group (inch) Vert spread(inch) 43.70 2597 41 0.47 0.25 43.85 2612 47 0.60 0.36 44.00 2633 15 0.54 0.26 44.15 2629 16 0.29 0.20 44.30 2652 21 0.45 0.03 44.45 2655 16 0.26 0.24 46.00 2656 22 0.40 0.13 140gr Hornady SST 140gr SST results: Brass etc as above but COAL of 1.872" Load (gr) MV (fps) ES Group (inch) Vert spread(inch) 42 2485 23 0.495 0.344 42.4 2525 33 0.222 0.200 42.8 2549 20 0.560 0.560 43.2 2592 6 0.390 0.530 43.6 2604 36 0.480 0.560 44 2599 31 0.30 0.20 Discussion: 139 Lap Scenar: The first thing of note was that those 139 Scenars shoot spectacularly well from the T3 TAC A1! You would be hard pressed picking the "best" load purely from ladder testing or grouping alone. What isn't shown above is the POI relative to adjacent loads so what I can reveal is that for the 139 bullets, the 44gr to 44.6gr loads all shot to almost exactly the same POI with lower loads starting to drift left and to scatter a little more (although I use the term loosely as the group sizes were all pretty good). In fact, there was only a 3mm difference between the central POI for all the groups from 44 to 44.6 gr. So why have I mentioned that the node was 43.8gr? Because this was on new brass and from previous testing I know that fire formed delivers between 20 and 25fps more, hence I'd need to drop the load down a little to arrive back on the same harmonic. The results here raise an interesting point with this combination, that even OCW isn't clearly defining the node. You could argue that the 44.3 was an anomaly on ES perhaps formed by a flier which may have had 0.1 more or less than the other two in the group, and it probably was as the plateau clearly runs from 44 to 44.45, hence the standard way of picking the accuracy node for allowing some sensitivity either side would be to pick the mid point at 44.2gr, knowing that you have leeway either side for temperature effects. I may do this. Also, fire formed typically (IME) sees a reduction in ES, so I would expect those ES figures to come down certainly a few digits f not more, perhaps into single figures. On relfection, the tightest group was shot close to 42gr load so extrapolating for fire formed I may just settle on a future load of 44 grains RS62 with this brass and primer and the 139 Scenar as that is likely to provide the best long distance load. These are not representative groups because they are not really groups, but eh evidence gleaned all shouts towards 44gr as being a safe bet with this super-shooting 6.5 bullet. 140gr Hornady SST This was a bit of a disappointment to be honest. I was hoping that it would shoot well from this rifle but the Lapua Scenar out-stripped it in terms of consistency and precision as well as in velocity. it was a respectable performance, just not a great one. I later found out why the precision was affected (more on that later*). Looking at the results, there was one node which stood out as head and shoulders above the others and that was 43.2grains with an ES of just 6, a group of 0.53 inches and a vertical dispersion of 0.39 inches. On a group alone, the 42.4 grain attempt was the best of the lot with the bullets forming one ragged hole measuring just 0.2 inches at the very most centre to centre. However, the ES of 33 is the key thing of concern and whilst the group was good at 100 yds, that sort of ES would not make for a good performance once much further out. On the basis of firing three shots at a dot over 100 yards, most people would take the ragged one hole "group" and walk away convinced that shooting doesn't get any better than that. They would most likely be disappointed the first time they tried a shot at a 200 yd squirrel and missed. 43gr to 44gr is where the velocity plateau lays; a full 1 grain pressure insensitive area which is a surprising but good result. The average velocity of 9 rounds shot between those loads varied no more than 12fps. POI to the average of each group within that bracket was almost identical. Picking the middle of that lot would be the smart thing to do, then load down 0.2 to account for the fresh brass. That makes the SST node (load) 43.3gr for a velocity of 2600 fps which is also beneficial with SSTs when using them on small deer as there is less chance of them exploding on impact at reduced velocity. The fire formed load will now be tested again for 43.3 grains and then seating depth adjusted to fine tune ES to the low double figures needed. This has been an interesting exercise and if anyone remains unconvinced by OCW methods, perhaps the discussion above hopefully demonstrates that there is some useful data to be had. Bearing in mind that the 140SST development took only 18 bullets and that's a great result, even though a little more work is needed. I fully acknowledge that no firm conclusions can, or should be drawn until fire formed are shot and tested, but as fresh brass needs to be shot anyway, it did no harm and as I had some 2F brass to hand with a few similar loadings, I was able to say with reasonable confidence that only a 20fps or thereabouts difference was noted. This will no doubt differ with large rifle primer brass. On that note, anyone reading this should NOT attempt to load their brass up to try and emulate these results based on my loads particularly if using large rifle primer brass where you will likely find that you need to reduce your loads quite significantly. The usual caveats aply: start low and work up. *Anyone trying the 140gr SST should note that this is an especially long for calibre bullet using Hornady's Secant Ogive design which makes for a long "pointy" aerodynamic profile. You have to take great care when seating to ensure it seats concentrically since it is all too easy for this to be pushed off centre resulting in excessive run-out which affects both pressure and ES as well as accuracy. If using a standard seating die, like the Lee seater, you wont manage to seat this bullet concentrically so don't even try without first modifying the seater plug (needs to be drilled). The answer is to use a purpose made VLD type seater plug. I use a Redding VLD plug with their micrometer seater and this, on average was producing bullets with about 2 thou run-out measured at a point roughly mid-way down the Ogive. That's still not great but try as I might, it was the best I could achieve. The lapua loads rarely deviated by more than a thou or so at the same point. Without a VLD seater you could be off by 15 thou or more! (in fact my first attempts wouldn't even chamber hence the strong advice to buy a VLD seater if using the SST bullets).

Fresh back from testing using OCW and I have found accuracy nodes using 43.8gr RS 62 for 2630fps, some 100fps under QL predictions and well under upper safe pressures judging by QL Velocity V's pressure data. This gave the lowest ES, still not into single figures, but not that far off at 12. a few tenths either side saw ES start to rise again into the 30's. Fire formed brass usage over new brass gave an increase of around 25fps, hinting at increased pressure for fire formed. I guess that as new brass has to obiturate to the chamber walls, part of that is plastic deformation so some pressure will be used up not driving the bullet but expanding the cases, hence the lower velocities on fresh brass. Something to watch out for if loading "hot" on new brass (not recommended). A switch to Murom small rifle magnum primers saw a very slight (5fps) increase on average velocities yet no changes to ES. The temperature as around 5 or 6 degrees cooler so I don't know if that had any bearing on proceedings.

I'll be trying that for the first time next week and comparing the outcomes with OCW. In theory, they ought to be the same, because you also note ES/velocity for OCW as well as fall of shot. In practice, I feel more comfortable seeing the fall of shot comparisons, even though the physics does stack up for the 10 shot OBT. The thing I have against it is that it relies upon there being no fliers to the loaded rounds in terms of ES. You have to be very careful to ensure almost perfection on loading if you are to rely on the results with confidence. (had a chuckle at the moan about bullets costing "..40 Cents apiece..." in that video)

I don't know the answer to whether there's been controlled tests I've found after changing primer type, re-doing the OCW tests resulted in much the same result but with better ES. It would be interesting to do though, if expensive on powder and bullets. Given that components are all of the same batch, I couldn't see any reason for repeating it unless a significant change in temperature (eg summer to winter) takes place. One thing's for sure and that's with ladder tests, because the group size shot is rarely representative you wouldn't always know if you were on the edge of a node or smack bang in the middle, at least not without shooting large strings. At least with the OBT or OCW tests, you can pick the node point which gives a better chance of being pressure tolerant. When changing to a new batch of powder, it's possibly worth re-doing the OCW as it doesn't involve too many bullets. At least you'd get a feel after a while with the powders used if it was worthwhile doing this or not.

PM'd

Long time since I revisited this thread but I've now shot the 175 TMK numerous times at long range and it's proved a worthy bullet to 1000 yds at 2660 fps MV, very consistent (44.2grs RS50 used with Murom KVB large rifle primers in Lapua brass but a not too stiff load of 44.6 also shot well at considerably more velocity). I've since bought a dedicated 6.5 long range rifle so probably won't be using the .308 as much for target but I can recommend the bullet.

Interested who else uses the OCW method to determine the least pressure sensitive plateau adjusting seating depth for grouping. I'm asking the question because at my last range outing there were a fair few people ladder testing using 3 shot "groups" which is something that bemuses me as longer run it tells very little about the load except approx' POI. Upon asking one chap, the response was "I don't ever shoot more than 3 and often just shoot 2 as it gets silly and expensive". I get the expense but that is a reality of load development. I don't get the logic of shooting a few. I mentioned this on another shooting forum and would be interested to poll results here to see how opinion differs from a more LR dedicated crowd. I hold my hands up and say that I'm a recent convert to the OCW method as it just seems to work and using half the ammo to get there. I can typically get a rough load within 21 rounds (3 sighters plus 6 groups of 3 for POI), then I usually load up 3 sets of 5 at the middle of the optimum range to confirm groups and MVs. If needed, I then alter seating depth, usually in 10 thou jump intervals, to fine tune the harmonic. Using the ladder system, I used to load (typically) 5 rounds at each charge across about 6 or seven charges, then play with seating if needed. 35 rounds V's 21.

It's another reason why load development can't really be done at 100 yds as the apps are a useful tool, but until you have your "developed load" and test at distance (I like to use anywhere between 400 and 600yds) then verification of BC or MV becomes difficult and you still don't have precision until tested and found to be so. That's why I think squeezing the smallest possible ES and consistency matters ultimately a lot more than MV. The downside of course is that your wind/environmental reading skills need to be a lot sharper if you start out significantly lower than ideally where you'd like to be. I prefer to look at that (initially anyway) as a positive but then again with only 18 months or so experience at very long range I may well change my mind about that after another few years!

That's about right, which is significant if in a comp. less so if not. ES though is just as important. I'd rather have single figure ES for a load than one with a few inches less wind drift but higher ES. The difference between elevation points drop combined with wind drift can easily result in a point or two dropped compared with a load which has tighter velocity spread. That's why I'm not going to overly stress about velocities but as I have the opportunity to work them up a little more as well as reduce ES, it's all part of the fun of learning with this small primer brass.

Only just bought some, but made sure I got 1000 whilst the getting was good! I've done a little more development and the 2nd firing on new cases will see how fireformed performs over fresh brass. Laurie's point is a key one though, and QL doesn't account for a change of primer to small primer brass. This seems to drop pressures significantly and I'm probably down somewhere in the high 40K PSI range with my latest tests of 2630fps. I'll need to load up in small steps to 45gr to achieve the velocities I'd get with LR brass, but one thing at a time, I'd like to load some more with Murom's magnum primers and see what happens. I'll have the results by close of play next Wednesday. I'll start a little lower to begin with at 43.5gr and load a few there and at 44.0, 44.3, 44.6, 44.8 and 45gr. I should be able to find a good harmonic and velocity at that range. I'm not after mega speeds and want the barrel to last, and the 139 Scenar is a very slippery bullet so only needs around 2600fps to perform well at 1000 yds. However, one of the ranges I shoot at always has a very awkward wind swirls and thermal effects with surprisingly small cloud variations and temperature variations, so getting my horizontal drift as low as possible is important hence trying to squeeze 2700 to 2750fps as a decent target would be beneficial.

Thanks for sharing your experiences chaps. Laurie, the SR primer point is well made and not something I that had really put much thought to. I'm quite surprised if the difference in ignition makes 150fps, but as QL has been quite accurate for other powder/brass/bullet combos I've used to date (other than RS!), as improbable as it might seem, then it has to be a material consideration, and as I've had next to no pressure signs, I could continue to load upwards and see what happens. However, as I only shoot to 1000 yards, then 2600-ish is all that's needed with such a slippery bullet. Perhaps trying some magnum primers such as the Remmy 7.5s or KVB-Ms might be worth a try though as a more efficient means of achieving some MV gains through higher ignition energy?

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.

I use that too and for the same reasons. Load testing went awry a bit yesterday as I had a few issues with mounts, so yet to test the loads. I have noticed on the rounds that I have shot out of mine (TACA1 6.5cm) that the cases were getting scratched quite badly. Culprit was the magazine lips which were not parallel, the RHS lip having quite an uneven, wavy edge which caught the cartridge side a little too firmly at one point as the round was being fed by the bolt. Will be looking for a replacement mag or having this one sorted.

Excellent advice from Laurie there Rich. To echo his comments, I've also found the QL predictions are a little out from measured results with RS50. There's something going in in QL which doesn't quite marry up with actual results from RS powders in this burn rate/energy for some reason. In my case in .308 and 175gr bullets, QL predictions were comfortably being exceeded in MV (and therefore likely in pressure too) by between 50 and 80 fps, so I am wary now when looking at QL results for RS powders. Recently, RS were kind enough to provide me with a QL run for my 6.5 CM and various bullets, and where the data enters the purple "high pressure" zone at approx 99% fill ratio with RS62 is where I'll probably draw the line in my load test ladder. So far, I've been finding loads that work well below where higher pressures may be encountered allowing a margin for safety.

+1 Their Skyhawk, Ranger, Night Hunter and Wildlife series are especially impressive. For the money, Skyhawk 8 x 42s are simply unbeatable with class leading optics and build at the price. Had a bins "shoot out" here last year and placed some Geovids up against some Skyhawks, Pentax, Opticron Discoveries. The Steiners and Geovids wiped the floor with everything else, and if anything, the Steiners stayed brightest out into dusk, and were certainly a match for the much more expensive Geovids. Edge definition and slight yellowing were an issue due to the lens design, but for 3/4 of the centre image, they were as good as many top glass optics at a fraction of the price. In daylight, the only other make that I use when stalking which comes close is a pair of Swaro CL 8 x 25s, which have the edge.....just!

Yes, just realised that as Laurie and others have confirmed this on another thread. It would seem that N150 is far better suited to the 140's form shorter barrels. I must get round to buying QL as it would seem invaluable to help take the guesswork out of a lot of load development!

I guess whether N165 would be suitable depends on barrel length. It'd probably be ok for longer barrels of say 30 inches but due to the full (compressed) case with 139/140 bullets to get anywhere near the velocities needed, N160 or even N150 would be better, especially in shorter barrels, between say 22 and 26 inch. N135 burn rate looks ok for the 100gr pills and should work well.

Chaz, if it's any help, I know a few people loading Vhit for CM homeloads and using 139 Scenars or 123gr pills. They're using N160 for these. Personally, if sticking to Vhit and loading for the lighter 100gr pills, I'd use N140, but would probably look at N160 for bullets up to 140gr. For the 6.5 heavies, N165 may be the better one but I haven't seen any results for that yet.

I'm swapping the 175's for some TMK 175s Laurie and will publish the load development results for 100 yds and 1000 yds when done. It will be interesting to compare them with the 190s (which punch a ragged hole at 100 from my rifle). I'll be using Lapua brass/Muron KVB-7 primers and RS50 propellant. Gbal, I only use the .308 as it is my hunting rifle and I haven't the funds nor inclination presently to build a dedicated 1000 yd rifle. If I did, I'd either go the 7mm or 6.5 Creedmore route. I like a challenge, and to me, achieving .5moa at 600 yds or 3/4moa at 1000 yds is my (possibly unrealistic) goal with a factory rifle. I've cracked moa at both distances and may have shot better if my technique and wind reading skills were better honed! It's really not for competition aims but for fun and learning.

I'm swapping the 175's for some TMK 175s Laurie and will publish the load development results for 100 yds and 1000 yds when done. It will be interesting to compare them with the 190s (which punch a ragged hole at 100 from my rifle). I'll be using Lapua brass/Muron KVB-7 primers and RS50 propellant.

Only just seen this. Excellent article Laurie and a good job that I haven't just gone out and bought 200 175gr SMKs to try at 1000 (doh!....I meant "I have"). I tried the #2155's but simply couldn't get the velocities needed at 1000 yds (I managed about 2,800 fps) and they were all over the place as they went through transonic region. Best results to date were with the venerable SMK 190s, which on the first outing after load development put up a respectable moa at 1000 yds from a factory barrel and may have grouped tighter without the gentle, but variable sidewind. As an aside, I am surprised that no-one yet has mentioned the newer TMK175s for 1000 yd F-Class/TR as their BC is significantly up on the older smk and they're still reasonably priced.

After using mine for the first time last week, can't recommend it highly enough. As long as you set them up and take into account that set-up needs a little work to get things sorted with whatever torch/gas you choose, then they really are good value, and seem to anneal with good consistency. Lubo's a great guy to deal with too.

Personally, my go-to knife for most out-door work is an orange handled Mora Heavy Duty Companion. Thick enough blade for battening, yet still slender enough for most skinning and gralloching. Having said that, bought myself this last week....sharp as a razor blade but won't get used for battening!

Received mine today. The couriers must have played football with it because is was kicked about and one end had buckled but easily enough sorted out. Once set up, it worked perfectly. I used a Go systems fine flame nozzle as above with some Propane (400g cannister). Really, it wants the canister vertically mounted and a hose connecting it. Makes the faffing about to get the torch aligned properly a bit easier and the canister instructions were to keep it upright during use. Once set up, it anneals quicker than you could with a cordless drill and more consistently. I was getting timings of about 3.6 to 3.8 seconds for 223 and about 4 seconds with .308. The propane heat does shorten time in the flame. Any more than 4.4 seconds with 308 or more than 4 seconds with 223 turned the flame orange. I didn't use Tempilaq, just wrote a case or two off finding the point at which the flame just started to burn orange and backed off the timings. Much cheaper than a bottle of tempilaq! Thanks Lubo. Good product at a sensible price....just a bit more extensive packaging would have been welcomed.