Laurie

If you're getting 2,700 fps with the 175 SMK and good groups, that really is an excellent factory load. Handloading will allow improvements, but not the large step change often associated with an upgrade from off the shelf ammo. Everything I hear about GGG suggests they produce good stuff - a far remove from RG 155gn 'Bisley Match'!

Assuming that the 175gn GGG uses the Sierra MK of that weight (as the NRA match 155 does), I'm not too surprised. At modest MVs, the old 175 often gives amazingly good good groups and is very barrel / chamber / velocity tolerant, at least until you try to drive it fast. I shot one of my smallest ever 100 yard 5-shot groups with an IMR-4064 handload with this bullet in 308 Win, moreover in a factory rifle, an early FN SPR tactical / sniper 24-inch barrel job. It was a genuine 0.1-inch and the rifle/handload shot very well at 300 yards too in the benched winter series 'Precision Rifle' matches we used to shoot at Diggle. For short / mid-range use, if you can get factory ammunition with this bullet to perform as well as that, it becomes difficult to justify handloading at times. Unfortunately, the old 175 with its modest 0.243 average G7 BC and the likely modest MVs from the GGG version isn't competitive these days in F/TR at 500/600 (unless shooting in a flat calm) even in club level competition and is ballistically hopeless beyond 800 yards. I quickly found this with my 175 SMK / 4064 handloads, the Catch 22 being that the tight groups came with ballistically sub-optimal low MVs in the 2,600s and the higher MV loads that met the external ballistics requirement wouldn't produce groups under 0.75-MOA. With a good 155 such as the 155.5gn Berger LRBT Fullbore the better long-range bullets up to and including the 185gn Juggernaut, a good F/TR rifle will average under 0.3-MOA at 100. Note the word average as <0.3-MOA means the best individual groups will be under 0.2-inches. My Osprey Rifles (now GS Precision) built Stolle Atlas will still shoot 0.15-Inch groups with the 155.5gn Berger at an MV that has dropped to through throat wear to 3,027 fps (32-inch barrel) despite it having seen nearly 3,000 rounds down the barrel. The average though will be about 0.3. These bullets at suitable velocities will hold under half-MOA elevation at 1,000 yards, most of a 20-round string in quarter-MOA or thereabouts, unless on a range where wind effects also have an elevation component as in Diggle and Blair Atholl when the wind comes from some directions. The heavier 30-cal bullets in the 200/210gn bracket don't usually group quite as tightly or hold as good elevations at long ranges but buck the wind better and so tend to give better L-R scores over a season. Even so, I've seen those 101RC guys who shoot national level F/TR and who generally like and still stick with the old 210gn Berger BT put five shots into ragged holes in loads testing at 100 at Diggle off the bench despite using not at all optimal bipod front-support.

RS60 is Alliant Reloder 17 under another name. American experience says this is one of the most temperature affected powders on the market and many competitive US shooters have dropped it for this reason. It will potentially give very velocities in this cartridge, but if loaded to maximum pressure / MV it will accelarate barrel wear significantly compared to RS62 or other non high-energy grades.

At 40/41gn that sounds like N150 ?????? The 139 Scenar remains an excellent and dependable performer in the calibre as does the antediluvian 142gn Sierra MK and both cost a lot less than the newer designs. The new heavier Hornady ELDs have impressive form factors / BCs and this is backed by Bryan Litz's tests so isn't a case of OTT claims from the manufacturer as would almost certainly have been the case some years back. Price and availability though? Ouch! We are also seeing a new generation of 'Super-VLDs' - impressive BCs, but at the expense of very long projectiles that are inherently less stable than older designs and which have 'aggressive' secant ogives ......... and when I say 'aggressive' I mean really aggressive, a much sharper transition than that of the original Berger VLDs of a generation ago. Some of these designs have to be the very devil to 'tune', albeit as always individual barrels and rifles will vary enormously in their tolerance or otherwise. Another issue with these super long, super-VLD forms is that they don't suit the 260 well in magazine use as they end up seated so deeply in the case at the required 2.800-2.880" COALs demanded by magazine dimensions. No issue in suitably throated rifles in single-shot mode, but many people are buying or fancy PRS type rifles or that evergreen object of British shooter lust, whatever is the latest AI model. The shorter case 6.5 Creedmoor must be seeing 'issues' here too with the newest designs and probably only the yet shorter 6.5X47mm Lapua remains unaffected (but only if it has the 'freebore' to suit the longer bullet designs). A couple of thoughts on alternatives. First for seriously COAL constrained set-ups especially with the 260, have a look at the 130gn Berger Tactical OTM AR-Hybrid. This is a superb design that combines good BC with a shorter nose to suit 2.8-inch COALs and the 'Hybrid' form ogive that allows it to be jumped considerable distances and yet stil perform well. They are unfortunately not plentiful on the market, and certainly not cheap - quite the reverse in fact! (Also many people say - I can't finds these bullets listed anywhere. The reason for this is that Berger has them in its small 'Tactical OTM' section not 'Target' and many people never look at this listing.) Second, there is another older but superb design available which is well known to US 6.5mm aficionados, but I rarely if ever hear mentioned this side of the pond - the 140gn Berger Target BT Long Range. This is the 6.5 equivalent to the 185gn 308 'Juggernaut' - a long-nose tangent ogive and easy to tune bullet with a good but not exceptional BC. It also has a short bearing surface allowing it to be driven faster than many competitor designs within safe pressures. This is my favourite 6.5 long-range bullet for the 260 and 6.5X55mm. Again, they're not common largely because few handloaders here know of them never mind order them ........... and they don't conform to the common Hybriditis disease condition that is like an epidemic causing great wallet sickness. Being a Berger though (of any vintage or type) it's good but never cheap. Lastly, do you have to have the highest possible BC design? .... or even one in the top half of the rankings? A lot of CSR type shooters like the 140gn Nosler Custom Competition and there are sources around for bulk buys from Europe at bargain prices if what is said on UKV is correct. Ah, but it's a blunt, 'low BC' bullet, surely? Yes, it is by 6.5 standards, but is way ahead of equivalent 308s and will remain supersonic at modest MVs to 1,000 yards. Sure, if you're competing seriously in long-range F-Class or similar, you want the best you can get and afford ........ but for occasional long-range or days on a Bisley electronic target on Stickledown. And at 300-800 yards most shooters won't notice a difference from the ELDs etc, especially as they are very easy to 'tune' and seem to suit most barrels. I used these old-fashioned bullets in a 1,000 yard BR comp a couple of summers back in an out of the box Savage 12 LRP with 26-inch barrel at a mere 2,710 fps MV (Creedmoor - this load with RS62 shot quarter to third inch at 100) and got a half-MOA group as best of four. (At a G7 BC of 0.281 from Litz, 2,710 fps MV saw an estimated 1,000 yard retained speed of 1,379 fps still comfortably above the transonic speed range on Diggle at nearly 1,000 ft ASL on a warm day.)

Don't forget the T3X Varmint if you can live with a synthetic stock, available in 260 and 6.5X55mm with a 600mm barrel length option. Alan Seagrave has used the older T3 Varmint / 600mm / 6.5X55mm to frequently win the 1,000 yard Factory Rifle Class in benchrest matches at Diggle for some time now and has shown it is competitive against rifles like the Savage 12 'Precision' in its 6.5-284 F-Class and 6mm BR Benchrest versions at this distance. (The Savage 12s are another option for 1,000 yard out of the box performance, the two mentioned above, 12 FTR in 308, and LRP (Long Range Precision) in 260 or 6.5 Creedmoor. Sadly they're nothing like as cheap as they were some years ago when we first saw them here. The F-Class, BR, and FTR are single-shot jobs with 30-inch barrels; the LRP a DB magazine with 26-inch barrel.)

You should be able to get higher MVs than 2,850 from the SAUM especially with RS70 which is one of Nitrochemie's 'high-energy' grades and has the advanced 'EI' infused deterrents technology. Nodes generally occur at around 100-150 fps MV intervals, sometimes smaller intervals though, so you need to work up in small steps and see when you hit the next one at higher velocities, checking that pressures remain acceptable for your barrel and in your highest local temperature conditions.

See: http://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/2018/05/good-news-for-gunsmiths-major-itar-changes-coming/#comments The detail isn't available yet, but it looks like many of the things we buy from the USA may be exempted. If so, good news.

Insofar as SR primers go, there is NO relationship between so-called 'magnum' primers and 'magnum' (hotter) performance. Magnum SR (and BR types) primers have thicker cups but often have the same pellet as the standard grade inside. Some individual models (including non-magnums) are slightly warmer than others. See first conclusion (commentary on Table 1) in: http://www.targetshooter.co.uk/?p=2662 What I increasingly see is the difference SR primers can make to performance - not in MVs but in matching the rest of the load and changing group sizes. This has two results. First some experimentation with primers may be necessary during load development to get best results, and 2) once you've settled on a primer model stick with it. Changing primer (sometimes even buying a new lot of an existing one) often requires the load to be fine-tuned again.

They have already been used in national level comps ........... BUT the tablets used as monitors are supplied to competitors by the organisers. They obviously have no ballistics etc apps installed and presumably cannot be communicated with by third parties. As well as meeting these requirements, there is the advantage to the line officers that everybody has the same kit, so any log-on or reception issues can be more easily resolved, unlike when every competitor is using his or her own kit. ICFRA will no doubt update its rules on this issue in due course.

The last I heard Milcun (Linda Miller and Keith Cunningham, the Canadian range owners and marksmanship training outfit) owned the rights to the onetime Plot-O-Matic and sold it under another name, as well as using it in some of their training work. It was originally developed by a Canadian TR shooter. It's not shown on their website anymore as far as I can see. http://www.milcun.com/index.html It doesn't do anything that a good standard paper plot won't except maybe show things a little more clearly, and it exacerbates the main problem that plotting poses for most tyros in this activity - time and distraction. Some people never get to grips with producing a full plot as it adds too much workload with all the other things you've got to do in the 45 seconds allowed between target reappearance and taking the shot. On the use of personal phones and tablets with electronic targets, I don't see that lasting past the initial learning curve / familiarization stage. The Americans went to match organiser-issued tablets from day one with their F-Class Nationals at Lodi last year and on other ranges where they've since being used. They have really strict rules on no competitor owned electronic or communications device other than timers and earmuffs being allowed by competitors ahead of a line 30 metres or somesuch behind the firing line - having your phone ring whilst on your person whilst taking part in an major match (or club one for all I know too) is a DQ or points penalty job. This is presumably to eliminate possible distractions to other competitors, but primarily as I understand it to prevent the use of computed wind reading / shot analysing etc aids, illicit communications from a friend behind the firing line coaching etc - as BoltHead says that's what's in the ICFRA rule book.

CCI-450 is thicker, as shown in the table you put up. 25 thou' v 20 thou' for the 400. It does make a difference, but any primer will crater / blank if the firing pin fit in its bolt aperture is poor and the pressure is high enough. The 6.5X47L has already brought out problems with certain makes and models of rifle / action, and the advent of the small primer variant of 6.5mm Hornady Creedmoor will undoubtedly bring out many more, but at least in the Creedmoor you can buy a set of good quality LRP cases and use them instead if SRP brass causes primer problems. For the 6.5X47L, it's a bolt bushing job or a replacement calibre barrel, or a rechamber to 260 Rem. I spoke to a gunsmith recently who said that from never doing a bolt bushing / firing pin reprofile job, he has done over 20 in the last year or two, (at somewhat over £300 a time) every one through people specifying 6.5X47L barrels on a model that was traditionally offered and used in 308 only. This issue is going to become more acute as more manufacturers offer the option of an SRP version of cases that have always been LR primed. Peterson Cartridge now offers 243 Win, 260 Rem, 6/6.5 Creedmoors, and 308 Win in both forms. Both retailers and customers have to be aware of the differences and their implications, and any potential pitfalls. I also worry that with SRP Lapua brass (we'll have to see about Peterson in due course) able to take serious over-pressures without distress, or often even any visible symptoms, the opportunities for dangerous overloads through transfer of SRP loads to standard LRP cases, either through ignorance or a mistake on the bench by one who has both types in use, will rise. Not only is the LRP form weaker, but the substitution of the large primer can be equivalent to adding a grain or more of powder to the charge in terms of pressures generated. Be warned!

Sooted cases due to low pressures / 'funny' ignition produce a weird range of symptoms, and yes I've seen soot in the extractor groove alone on occasions. It may not be simply overly low pressures loads that's the issue here. You may need to change primer to get one whose characteristics suit the powder / internal ballistics relationships better. For some reason, 6.5mm cartridges seem to be more prone to this issue than others. I first came across it with N150 and 160 in 6.5X55mm many, many years ago and moved from the CCI-200 primer which was the most widely available at the time to the 250 magnum - which cured it. There was no apparent rhyme or reason to the appearance of the problem - same load shot on the same range in apparently same temperatures would soot brass up on one weekend and not the next, alongside to the amount of soot and its nature / location being equally variable. Despite being called a 'Magnum' that Murom primer is a mild example and has seen problems in its Wolf and Tula brand name guises in US XTC with some ball powders, even with the 223's small charges. That's why Murom introduced the thick cup, but 'hotter' brisance SR 223 REM model.

I should have qualified my reply to say N560 which is very much slower burning than N160, and in fact often acts as a slower burning powder than N165. My experience is that it can be finicky and also need max pressure loads to perform consistently. In sporter length barrels, one symptom of it being unhappy is muzzle flash like I've never seen with anything else! Viht doesn't list this powder with any bullet weight in the cartridge. N550 should be happier, but if you look at the recently revised Viht data, both N550 and N160 are shown for the 160gn Nosler Accubond, the nearest to what you're using. N160 perhaps a little surprisingly gives another 50 fps over N550. Hornady in its most recent manual has data--sets for both 280 Rem and 7X64, but no Viht powder loads - in fact there is not much Viht data in this manual anymore and recent additions like the 6.5 Creedmoor have none at all (likewise Sierra). Both it and Lyman 50th just out (for the 280 alone here) show best results from IMR-4350 and for best MVs IMR/H4831. So, this gives an indication of post-Reach alternatives: IMR-4451 (for 4350) and when it arrives IMR-4955 (for the 4831s) Viht N160 which despite being shown as equivalent to IMR-4831 in most burning rate charts often acts more like the 4350s and at the least is somewhere between the 4350s and 4831s. See Viht's data. Viht N550 Ramshot Hunter (Hornady lists 52.6gn max for its 162s for 2,600 fps in a 22-inch barrel Sauer 101, not the highest MV in the table) QuickLOAD computes another 90 fps from this combination for nearly 2,700 fps and a very good match to the cartridge and bullet. (Using the 162 AMax as I don't have the ELDs in my version.) Alliant Re19 and 22 should both work. QuickLOAD suggests Re19 is an excellent match ballistically, but if you're chasing MV several more grains Re22 and a compressed load gives almost as high MVs as you can safely get. Reload Swiss lists loads for the 7X64 but the nearest bullet to the Hornady 162 is the 168gn Sierra MK and shows loads for RS60 / RS62 / RS70 / RS80. (80 is hopeless - far too slow burning.) QuickLOAD suggests RS62 and RS70 are excellent matches.

You may encounter considerable muzzle blast and flash with anything under a really high pressure load.

Yes

The 7X64 is very close dimensionally and ballistically to the 280 Remington although neither brass nor loaded cartridge is interchangeable. (Actually, it's the other way round as 7X64 is very much senior to the US upstart near-copy!) The advice on loads is to use 280 Rem data and subtract 5% from the maximum for safety. So look up pet loads on the 280 if you don't find much on the Brenecke. Redding Deluxe are standard non-bushing dies. Good quality IME. If the neck tension is too high, remove the expander in the sizer die and get or if you already have one use, a mandrel type expander die which allows interchangeable mandrels designed for expanding the neck before neck-turning. I use the Sinclair expander die body and the same company's 28E model expander on all my match sevens and the degree of neck tension is just where I want it. The K&M equivalent should be fine too. Lube the inside of the neck before use, or else shell out for a very expensive carbide mandrel. https://www.vihtavuori.com/reloading-data/rifle-reloading/?cartridge=82 I'd have thought N160 is well suited to the cartridge, N165 for 170gn and heavier.

Remember the small primer / flash-hole effect on pressures and MVs compared to large primer results. In 308 Win, the norm is that 'Palma' brass needs somewhere between 0.5 and 0.7gn more powder to produce the same MV as the same internal capacity standard LR primer case with H4895 and H. VarGet class powders. However, when I did side by side tests of SR primers in 308 Win (written up in Target Shooter online) with the 167gn Scenar and Viht N150, I started out with side by side load development using Lapua 'Palma' and standard cases in the same range session. I found with this powder which has a not dissimilar burning rate to RS62, that a 1.4gn heavier charge was needed in the SR Brass to get equivalent MVs. (the 260 is of course an LR primed case, so gets the hotter ignition.)

Vince ('The Gun Pimp') has just put up the final part of my Small Rifle primer test in 308 Palma brass on Target Shooter online.

Interesting! As an aside, what do you do re 'jump' for the 155gn Hybrid? I've not found this an easy bullet to 'tune' - in my chamber / barrel it seems to need a large jump (40 thou' or more) before it'll perform. (By contrast, the 168gn Hybrid only performs if treated like a VLD and seated 'in' - not just me who has found that so it seems to be a general feature for this model. I'm not over-impressed by 30 calibre Hybrids as the Berger / Litz claims of tangent ogive like flexibility simply haven't stood up to scrutiny for me so far.)

Whatever you do, don't trust QuickLOAD with RS52. IME it seriously underestimates pressures and MVs. As an example, to take one of my two main FTR loads - RS52 + 168gn Berger Hybrid in Lapua Palma SR brass - setting everything up correctly in QL (actual case overflow water capacity; COAL; bullet in the lands and severely enhanced shot start pressure), QuickLOAD predicts 55,198 psi PMax and 2,870 fps MV from a 32-inch barrel for my load. As the small primer brass normally needs at least a half-grain additional powder to achieve the same MVs as the standard LRP Lapua 308 case, reducing the charge weight in QL by that amount to obtain the equivalent charge for a Lapua LRP case load sees the the prediction reduce to 53,457 psi / 2,842 fps. The actual MV is 2,960 fps which will need somewhere around the full SAAMI 62,000 psi maximum chamber pressure to achieve and the QL calculation is 1.7gn RS52 awry on the 'wrong side', equivalent to maybe 2.2gn 'out' taking the small primer factor into account. I have seen similar wrong results in other cartridges. It's a great powder. A simple rule of thumb I have that has worked for me in three cartridges so far including 308 is to take Hodgdon's starting load for VarGet, use that and work up towards Hodgdon's maximum. You can usually go a little higher than the VarGet max and will get 25-40 fps higher velocities, but you may not want to go there anyway getting good results and high enough MVs at somewhat lower charges. When it was first made available as a bulk powder under the Nitrochemie OEM of EI-N130 without any loading data, its working name was 'Elcho-15' as it was believed to behave similarly to VarGet and Alliant Re15. I did side by side tests in 308 against these two powders with a variety of bullet weights and found that what is now packaged as RS52 performed very well at the same charge weights as the other two, but could be loaded higher and usually outperforms them. Taking my rule of thumb, Hodgdon lists a load for the 155gn Sierra MK, 2.775" COAL, Winchester case, F210M primer and H. VarGet as starting load 44.0gn, maximum 47.0gn (compressed) for 49,400 Copper Units Pressure showing this an old load (pre Piezo crystal psi pressure gauge measurement). The SAAMI MAP is 52,000 CUP under this measurement method, so the maximum is comfortably within that powder's top pressure levels. However, Winchester brass has a greater internal capacity than Lapua, so another of my rules of thumb has me reduce any such recommended load by 1gn on changing the case. So, to use Varget as a guide to RS52, work on starting load 43gn with a maximum somewhere around 46gn, but in practice you'll likely find that you can go higher without pressure issues.

Both the original (all alloy) Tier-One and the 2/3 metre-footprint carbon model are very good indeed. Likewise the Dolphin AB (another carbon fibre legs model) and the alloy Shooting Shed Stotteben. (The Stotteben is the widest of the wide at even more than 660mm footprint when at its lowest setting.) They and the SEB Joy-Pod are all effective, easy to set up and use and can be seen being used by our top international FTR shooters. Bearing in mind David Bonwick (Shooting Shed) only making occasional limited production runs of his Stotteben, you see it in use by a disproportionate number of such competitors, but the SEB is likely the most popular at top club, and national levels. I have both the Dolphin AB and Stotteben models currently on loan for review, have shot them with F-Open rifles up to 284 Win with 180s and regard them as very good indeed. I'll shortly do a write-up for them as a follow-up to that for the Tier-One Carbon in Target Shooter. The best one? It's a personal preference issue - I'd be happy to use any of the trio (and/or the SEB JoyPod). The Tier-One models with their spoked mariner wheel adjusters are probably the easiest to make minor in-comp height adjustments excepting of course the SEB with its joystick. (But it's remarkable how many people lock that one up solid and shoot without using the joystick facility.)

RS62 worked VERY well for me in the slightly smaller case capacity 6.5 Creedmoor with the 140gn Nosler HPBT Custom Competition. With the 260 having slightly greater capacity than the Creedmoor, that should actually make the powder even better suited to it. I should have said that I saw early pressure onset problems with other combinations too that I know are fine in the 260, so it seems that something isn't right with the rifle.

I ran into pressure problems in 260 with the 139 / RS62 at lower levels (c. 43gn) than expected. ......... but my 260's barrel is pretty well shot out and pressures often rise dramatically in this situation due to rapid copper build-ups, so it may or not be a pointer. In any event, the rifle has been temporarily retired until a rebarrel in 260AI takes place later this year. If I read Post #16 right, you're thinking of using RS62 in both 260 and 308 Bob? I've not seen any mention anywhere of using it in 308 and on the face of it, the powder is too slow burning for this cartridge with 155gn weight bullets. RS50/52 are a much better match. Running RS62 through QuickLOAD with a 155 predicts pressures under 40,000 psi and by RS62 standards a poor charge burn ratio barely above 90% in a 26-inch barrel. That's with a load that is heavily compressed too. It might behave OK, but being below a normal working pressure might produce rather erratic results. Having started to play with 308/RS62 in QuickLOAD, I though I'd see how it looks with heavier bullets, 185gn and upwards in a long frreebore 30-inch FTR style rifle set-up. It may just be a possible alternative to Viht N150/550 there playing around modelling the 185gn Berger Juggernaut and 200gn Hybrid. The charge burn rises to 99% and PMax to the high 50,000s psi (predicted) with velocities approaching the required levels. It would still appear to involve compressed loads even with optimal (long) COALs for the rounds though. As always, QL is only a model, not real life, but I may try RS62 in my 308 FTR rifle later this year with the 185 Juggernaut and 190gn VLDs to see how it works out in practice. Viht N150 is a very good propellant in this application with no real need for change, but options are always worth having a look at.

It likely shows just how mad the demand for good Creedmoor brass is over in the US! I imagine it's cheaper than Lapua there.

Viking Arms said some months back that they would be importing Peterson Creedmoor and 308 brass as well as others.