VarmLR

I think the differences between the CM and 'x47 are that while you can probably get similar velocities with say a 139 or 123 Scenar or similar using RS 62, but you're having to run the 'x47 to higher pressures.  The 260 and CM just have slightly longer legs due to the case capacity differences,  but i get why the '47 is so popular. 

I think that part of the issue using N160 with the 6.5 x 47 is the bulk density doesn't allow enough into the case to generate the speeds but also the specific energy is somewhat lower than H4350 and RS62.

N160 is rated at a relatively low 3,620 joules, H4350 (sadly no longer an option here) is 3,760 Joules and RS62 is 3,750 Joules so much closer to H4350 than the N160.

Bulk density of the N160 is 920 so less than RS62 which is 960 hence you won't be able to get as much into the case weight-wise using N160.  It might suit a taller powder column and heavier bullet but doesn't seem ideally suited for what you need it to do.  Unfortunately until the lockdown is over, that means you have a choice...either make some reloads using the remaining RS62 or wait a while?  Cost of specialist delivery wouldn't be worth it for a few Kilos.

I think that all barrels, heavy profile included, will whip harmonically, if with some contours and weights, with less amplitude.  Load development pretty much works with this to achieve best results when that whip is consistent back on or near axis.  Not personally a fan of fluted barrels though as although they may be stiff for their mass, I guess they have more potential to alter POI with heat build up unless machining tolerances are very precise.  As with many things in the shooting world I think it's difficult, if not impossible to lay 10 different barrels out of competition match profile proportions and point nto the one that will be more accurate as there is so much more involved, including quality of steel, rifling, consistency of machining and lapping and concentrically of chamber etc etc.  I haven't shot enough different barrels to have a favourite but of the custom ones I have, they didn't perform any better really than my factory Tikkas, the best being more a match profile contour than heavy barrel.  That may say more about my load development and cleaning regime than the barrels though! Amongst the ultra long range boys State-side, the heavy Bartlein barrels seem to be very popular.

The most accurate rifle I have currently is bedded into an alloy chassis so not sure I buy that theory about timber.  The Tikka Tac A1 is superbly accurate without needing to weigh in at 60lbs.  I also have a T3 with a laminate stock (GRS) and this is also accurate.  I prefer the GRS stock ergonomically and it is comfortable to shoot.  Design of the stock matters as much as the material.  Whether wood or aluminium or firbreglass, the idea as I understand it is to transfer the harmonics as close on-axis as possible and imho to have a barrel fully floated.  The bullet has already left within 1.5 to 2mSecs but harmonic damping likely goes on a little longer.  Proof of the pudding is looking at competition groups and a few years ago I seem to remember that a Tikka Tac in 260Rem won a 600yds shoot at Bisley with an impressive 2.7 inch group or thereabouts from a factory rifle.

In the States, a similar Tac A1 recorded a group of 3.5 inches at 850 yds:  https://www.gunsamerica.com/digest/3-5-inch-group-850-yards-tikkas-amazing-t3x-tac-a1-6-5-full-review/

Point is, that whether you use a KRG, Tikka, Ruger or other alloy stock of similar design and mass, they work and work really well.

They are crazy.  Must admit I stick with 139 Scenars..they just work and aren't to spendy.

19 hours ago, No i deer said:

44grs of RS62 In a creedmoor..??

Yes.  No problem at all.  I've been using that load for a few years.

I'm using 44gr RS62 under a 139 Scenar seated at 15 thou off the lands.  Load started to compress at a few grains more but at 44grns was fine.  2700fps@20 degrees C using Lapua SRP brass from a 24 inch Tikka barrel.  LRP brass gives around 100fps more using over a grain less, so ties in very well with H4350 and N160.  I doubt there's much to chose between N160 and RS62.  Does anyone have any pressure sensitivity data on N160 so I can compare with RS62?  If N160 is less sensitive I may switch to using that.

Post-edit...actually, checking the specs, there is enough of a difference to show RS62 is the better choice (see below).

Personally I'd go for a good used Anchutz model 1450 or 1460.  Nicely made, more refined than the CZ's and accurate little rifles plus not that spendy either.

Just for fun, I used Strelok Pro to give me a fire solution for a 5mph side wind using my 1000yd load (Scenar 139 @ 2700fps).

The fire solution was 28.5MRADs up and 1.6Mrads for wind with a terminal velocity close on 935fps.  I can dial for 19 or 20MILS and hold off the rest with my current ring system so it might work at a mile but I'm unsure of whether these scenars are that stable through the transonic range.

The same data for my 190grn SMK in 308 gave 36.1Mrads up and 1.8 for windage with a terminal velocity of 875fps.  I would need a change of rings or 20moa rail with my current scope for that but know that the 190 is stable through transonic.  It would be interesting to compare them but neither would be anything like ideal for that sort of range.  I'd be happy just to hit a 1m square target!

I'm afraid most of these long range rifles are beyond my more modest budget constraints as at roughly £5 per "bang" and lots of practice needed it's something that would benefit from a team approach with sponsorship otherwise it's a wealthy man's sport!

I was quite impressed how some at the Ko2M held roughly half a minute of angle at a mile.  That was extraordinary shooting when you consider what even slight differences of wind or even cloud cover can do.   I felt very smug whilst shooting at Warminster once with the 6.5 putting most of my 10 shot string into around a 7 or 8 inch group until the cloud cover came rolling in and threw the next few shots all over the place and that was only at 900m! 

Like Baldie though I was a bit mystified when some of the Ko2M shooters were told "Low, lift 2 MOA" or similar that they simply put the next few bullets exactly into the same place and when interviewed after blamed it on "it's a new rig..trying to get used to it" type of excuse.  Spotting that that distance I think might, in that heat, be made more awkward by mirage but they ought to have links to a local camera and a screen at the shooting position with one person monitoring that and one on a scope.  It's all too easy to become an arm chair critic though!

I get a lot of enjoyment out of shooting at a small Gong at 600 yds or similar at a small fraction of the cost but it would be great to try a days LR at a mile.   Perhaps once the lockdown has finished'...

39 minutes ago, Trigger73 said:

And this ^^^^ in a nutshell. 

This has been said so many times in different "hobbies" that I've had and been involved in over the years. 

Some folk are lucky enough to be able to afford a £2.5k scope and another £1.5k scope on a separate rig. 

I'm comfortable at the £1k mark so from the research I've done the IOR seemed to be the better scope, I may be completely wrong hence this thread. 

But to buy a £400 Vortex? I see no point as previously mentioned I've owned better scopes. 

If it turns out that the IOR isn't as good as Richard suggests then I'll have no problem saying so. 

The Gen 2 Vortex doesn't compare with earlier models...it's way better and it's also not £400!

https://www.opticswarehouse.co.uk/vortex-viper-pst-gen-ii-5-25x50-ffp-illuminated-30mm-riflescope-moa

Under £1000, it would be my choice.

At just over, this is what I would buy:

https://www.opticswarehouse.co.uk/bushnell-elite-tactical-dmr-ii-3-5-21x50-ffp-g3-mil-riflescope

OW give good service to be fair and I know that anyone who's had trouble with any scopes bought from them has been well looked after.  My Steiner came from them and as a result of my feedback, and their check of remaining stock to find exactly the same issues, they no longer stock that scope.  They do listen.  They try not to sell crap, but the odd one no doubt slips through.  Yes, Richard is affiliated with them but having owned or tried a number of the scopes he's reviewed, I've only had cause to have issue with a few of his conclusions and for most of us who didn't come up the river in a bubble, we generally know what we're looking for and recognise any BS for what it is.   Richard gave a glowing review of the Delta Titanium but never once mentioned how crap the turret adjusters were...to be fair the glass (at least 3/4 across anyway) was deserving of his comments but the turret adjusters were crap.  The glass alone made it worth the cash until it got very popular and prices inexplicably rose as demand was there to justify it from a business proposition but by then the Steiner Ranger had overtaken it in optical as well as mechanical quality....even outstripping its more expensive siblings!  My PMII came from OW and it's the best I've owned.  An ATACAR might be nice but is different rather than "better" in terms of results on target in varying conditions and on reliability or on glass quality.  It pays to do your homework and speak to as many ownersas you can as next to a rifle, a decent scope is about the most expensive outlay in the sport you'll make.  It's been said many times before but buy once, cry once.

20 hours ago, L B Jefferies said:

I agree with Chris NZ, I wish they had brought out N155 rather than N555. 

+1

I'll be sticking with RS62.

There was not a lot wrong with the Hogddon H4350 and RS62 is pretty darned close to that.  Not a lot wrong with N150/160 either.

It'd be well worth the travel and overnight accommodation to have a day shooting at 1 mile.  It would also be a good opportunity to invest in a nice custom ultra long range rifle!  I think that the 6.5's and most of the 7's are probably good to 1200 if not 1400m so fall a little short and it'd probably be a waste of ammo even trying at a mile but plenty seem shoot it using 338 Lap mags.

One thing to bear in mind about scope reviews, is that most are purely subjective.  Very few test or report on tracking repeatability and accuracy, resolution as tested against a standard, the various forms of distortion etc etc.  There was one on Precision Rifle Blog a few years back which gave a more balanced objective view so you can see the sort of things that they looked for which are really of more use in comparisons:

https://precisionrifleblog.com/2014/09/19/tactical-scopes-field-test-results-summary/

There has also been discussion on this forum a year or two back on the best way to undertake scope field tracking tests which is also worth a read.

Also, worth not under-estimating the importance of the scope mounts either.  Inexpensive ones may look tempting but don't be tempted.  

I think you've made a decent enough choice there in the Vulcan.  Vortex pricing and business model is such that it covers for returns in this way so unlike owners of Khales, Swaro or S&B who wouldn't expect any issues (that's not to say that there haven't been any) they can always send them back for a no quibble repair or exchange.  Richard does present some good reviews...I bought a Delta Titanium based on one of his, but sometimes doesn't cover things that more long term ownership might bring up so like all reviews, take it with a small pinch of salt.  His comments on the optics though seem pretty spot on.  I know that some NF owners of the entry level models were having some issues not found on the (better) NSs and ATACR scopes so there is also the question of some manufacturers introducing models which may not be all in-house with the same QC, to try and get a bite ant the more entry level markets.   From what I read of the Vulcan though it seems pretty sound.  Best of luck and why not report back and give us the low-down on optics, dialling reliability (it might be fun do do a dialling test on it), use of the ret etc?

The only issue I once had with some premium euro optics was with a set of Swaro Bins. I was the second owner.  They returned them good as new, no charge 4 weeks after I sent them in, fully expecting to pay a bill for the repair works. Can't ask better of any company than that! 

I find that the "real world" reviews offered by owners, rather than reviewers, ultimately of greater value, especially if they've used them for an extended period.  That takes nothing away from Richard as he's a good guy.  He used to be a regular visitor to the gunsmith I use but don't know if he still is.

Recently stumbled upon these series of videos.  the interludes where they question people like Brian Litz make interesting listening.  Is it just me or does Brian get younger looking every year LoL!

Anyway, some amazing shooting on display here with a fair few half moa groups at one mile which is outstanding.

I compared the Recon with a PM2 and a Gen2 Vortex Razor, Khales, and Steiner top of the range model.

The ergo on the Steiner was great but the optics were abysmal so I sent that one back..l.truly sencond rate with obvious edge distortion and a yellow fringe on the image.  Their cheaper scopes were much better! The Gen2 Vortex was amazing.  Good fov, superb bright, crisp image but I found the mass and the busy stadia ret off-putting.  Of the lot, I think it had the brightest image.

The IOR had a great contrasty image but the ret was quite thick on it and the colour cast from the coatings whilst making some darker objects better in contrast left a pronounced cast over things although the image was clear and bright.  It seemed well made and rugged.  The cast renminded me of the coatings that Leupold used to use for their hunting scopes a little.  Great scope and I was tempted but that ret!

I  liked the optics on the Khales a lot but found the eye relief just a little too short for me.

The PM2 I found perfect for my tastes.  Crisp image, possibly 2nd best of the group, no obvious colour cast, a fab ret and I loved the simple, intuitive dialling with the double stack turrets.  I much preferred it to the IOR tbh but that's my eyes and my preferences.  You're best to try for yourself.

One thing put me off the IOR and I know plenty on here love them and have had no issues but I do know someone who had to send 2 Cruisader scopes back due to turret issues, and the second one ended up with the same fault as the first.  A quick google showed that this was not an uncommon occurrence and like the chap I know, others had to wait a long time for anything to be done and the scope to be returned.  That put me off.

For me, the top 3 choices for LR were the PMII, Khales and the Vortex.  I would have bought the Vortex for the superb warranty and that amazing bright sight picture if it hadn't been for the open centre, very busy ret, so I ended up with the PMII and have been delighted with it ever since.  It has been faultless and consistent on dialling.  Love the optics too.  VFM I think that the Gen2 Razor had it though.

Good luck with your IOR Vulcan though.  Hopefully some of the reliability niggles of the older models will now have been sorted, and they have a decent enough rep.

Just dug out the 24.6 grn group:

Velocities and consistency was better using RS50 though.  I shot a load ladder and 24.6grn is shown as a plateau on the traph below giving an average of 2842fps:

I'll dig out my load data later on but I seem to remember group sizes being oveall more consistent using RS50.

15 hours ago, KABOOM said:

Im happy to read this! I plan to do some work with the 69TMK and hadn't seen much on results this is encouraging! Atm I use the 55 grn blitzkings with super results, on prarie dogs, would be fine of jackrabbit , fox or coyotes too.

 

I've used these extensively with mixed results using N140 but settled on 24.6gr with two seating depths producing similar results.  Average, prone, still day using 3 shot gropups was .25moa, best was 0.18moa, then on 5 shot groups the average over time worked out at .4moa.  It's ok but it didn't produce as good grouping as the smk for me.   It works well with a longer jump too.  In my chamber about 100 thou off the lands produced very consistent groups with a slightly compressed load of N140 compred with 15 thou off the lands.  I found the 55grn sgks as good tbh launched at 3,200fps.

15 hours ago, miki said:

Yes. sorry I missed that - I though RS50 was more for the 30 and larger callibers RS Charts

RS50 is what I use with heavier 223 bullets and it is a very good match indeed.  If you do a little searching on here you should find some of my data for the 77TMK and RS50.  It outperformed N140 with lower observed pressure signs.

As others have said, the fact your rifle was spitting 60/62grn bullets about is more to do with the load not being properly developed for your barrel.  The bullet length and mass of just about any 60grn or 55 come to that will be just fine in a 1/9 twist.  You just have to find the node that works.  If not already looked at, I recommend you read about Dan Newberry's OCW (optimum Charge Weight) load development.  You ideally need access to a chrony if intending on shooting more than a few hundred yards out but inside of that OCW should get you a good enough node.

4 hours ago, ontoproofer said:

Hi Miki

yes big lump for a 223 but I get v bulls at 600 yards and have even hit a gong at 1000 yards lol.

The rifle doesn't stabilise 60 gr bullets or less I think that's more for a rifle with a 1 -12 twist

Ive been looking on the viht site today and it recommends the n540 for those bullet weights so hopefully happy days ! 

Not true!

I use a tighter twist than you and mine shoots everything from 45 to 77grn perfectly well.  My go to vermin bullets are 55 and 60grn respectively.  Yours should shoot 60grn fine with the right load.

Bear in mind that the use of double base powders like N540 or RS52 will wear your barrel out much quicker than single base loads if you are shooting anywhere near the top end loads.  Even mildly warm loads with N540 can have a surprisingly detrimental barrel life effect on some barrels.  I have shot mine with 77grn bullets to 1000yds using single base RS50 just fine but can't claim it's anything like competitive as it just isn;t a high enough BC bullet for 1000yds.  80 to 90grn dedicated LR bullets are better suited for the 223 at 1000 if you want more consistent results.  I've found even at 600yds that the 69tmk can be very badly blown about in relatively light winds.

RS50 is what I use withy 77grn TMKs and I get good velocities with that, certainly better than with N140 which has a similar energy, for some reason.  You might struggle to stabilise a 75gr bullet with a 1/9.  My 1/8 is marginal with some 80grn bullets but 77smks work well.  Depending on the ranges you intend shooting you might be better off trying the 69TMKs and see which shoots better for you.

We had similar with crows two years back, and gave up shooting them as it didn't bag enough.  A Larsen trap was the answer and in one morning alone we must have had double figures inside the trap...probably one of most effective means of control where large numbers are concerned.  The problem with them is using outside of the pairing season ( March to June) their mates can cotton on quickly and become trap shy.  Using them early in spring I think is best as id disrupts the pairing and breeding for that year.  I've tried shotgun, rifle, scaring and the usual methods but the two I favoured most were the crow call (under cover close to a perching tree) and the Larsen trap.

Never seen as much as a 15% loss, that's quite devastating!  We have lost about 3 to 4% of one very large wheat field due to deer though.  Quite a few Roe got in and made circles to lay down to ruminate and within weeks a surprisingly large loss of crop ensued where big clumps had been randomly flattened.

Vortex Viper Gen2 is a no-brainer....the glass imho is better than any sightron I've looked through.  A used NSX is also a good shout and so is a new or used Bushnell DMR Elite....Plenty of those seem to find their way onto long range rifles and I know of a good few 50 cal users with one of those sat atop.  Mechanically very robust and reliable scopes but not in the same league as top class Euro optics from the likes of S&B/Swaro/Khales.  For mounts I'd recommend the Burris XTR Signature rings with a hefty amount of adjustment built into the design which will take you out to way beyond 1000yds.  Details here: https://www.rifleshootermagazine.co.uk/kit-tests/optics/in-depth-test-and-review-of-burris-xtr-signature-scope-rings-1-5640068