What is the most transonically stable .224 bullet?

Armory » Reloading

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - What is the most transonically stable .224 bullet? (Page 1 of 2)

Posted: 2/13/2017 11:45:26 PM EDT

I'm having transonic stability issues with my Hornady 75gr HPBT handloads from my LaRue 1/8 twist 18" barrel. At 650-700 yards I'm shootings about 1.25 moa, after that the load falls apart and groups open up to 2-2.5 moa.

Are there any transonically stable bullets out there will help keep things from falling apart?

Posted: 2/13/2017 11:59:48 PM EDT

[#1]

That bullet should be supersonic past 900 yards. Have you chronographed your loads?

Posted: 2/14/2017 12:01:31 AM EDT

[#2]

Quoted:
I'm having transonic stability issues with my Hornady 75gr HPBT handloads from my LaRue 1/8 twist 18" barrel. At 650-700 yards I'm shootings about 1.25 moa, after that the load falls apart and groups open up to 2-2.5 moa.

Are there any transonically stable bullets out there will help keep things from falling apart?

View Quote

FWIW:
And just my humble opinion:
Those bullets are hard to push that far out. 600yds + it's about your original velocity and the elevation where you are shooting.
I don't think ANY bullet is really stable going trans sonic.
Partially because "I'm mile high" if I get my loads above 2700 they will stay transonic out to 1000yds.
For you ............. 2850??

Try the 77TMK's................ just saying..............

Oh and post pictures of those groups at 700yds .................... or it didn't happen.

We don't do call outs in this technical forum. dryflash3

Posted: 2/14/2017 12:06:11 AM EDT

[#3]

Quote History

Quoted:
That bullet should be supersonic past 900 yards. Have you chronographed your loads?

View Quote

Yes..... without knowing the original velocity and elevation ..... it's going to be a guess.

Posted: 2/14/2017 1:06:58 AM EDT

[#4]

I was under the impression that the bullet can start to lose stability at ~1340 fps.

Attached File

I'm by no means an expert here. I'm just a guy who has been doing a lot of research and trying to learn as much as I can.

I only took one pic because I wasn't thinking lol. Here's a 5-shot group at 660 yards, it measured ~7"

Attached File

Posted: 2/14/2017 2:23:32 AM EDT

[#5]

Sweet picture!
Nice.......

Have you confirmed your velocity?

This is my experience:

-I used to shoot BHA 75's in my SR. Shot great out to 600yds (Like a 194/200 -so comparable to your result)! Then when I tried to shoot them out to 1000yds, they fell apart somewhere around 800yds. Again this was a 5000ft elevation and I'm not home or I'd tell you the muzzle velocity. At 1000-- one on paper, one off.
-I've been playing at 1000yds with a 20" Krieger SR barrel. My 80gr SMK (at 2700fps) will make it at my elevation. My TMK loads (at around 28-2900 fps) make it too.
-I haven't tried other loads....... I just avoid the transonic issue by shooting above it.

Looking at your chart..... a muzzle of 2600fps seems weak.
And at 110ft elevation......... you'd need to safely bump that up to stay above the transonic levels.

Posted: 2/14/2017 3:40:53 AM EDT

[#6]

I googled and 1340 is a number from Bryan Litz. Interesting!

I've shot the 75 BTHP to 800 yards and my target was literally a steel buffalo but I did hit. At 1000 it was hopeless. No feedback from that little bullet.

You need a higher BC and a higher muzzle velocity.

Posted: 2/14/2017 11:17:27 AM EDT

[#7]

@TGH456E

Thanks! That's the best I've shot to date.

I've run my loads through a chrono and I'm averaging 2600 FPS out of my LaRue 18" barrel. I'm using LC brass, 24 grains of RL-15, Rem 7 1/2 primers, and Hornady 75gr HPBT seated to mag length. I've thought about trying to get some extra velocity but have read a lot of conflicting reports about going over 24 grains of RL-15 so I haven't tried yet.

I've also thought about trying some 80 grain bullets but really don't want to have to single feed them.

@Combat_Jack

I was doing some research when I came across an article by Bryan Litz, which as you found is where I got the 1340 fps number from. I'm going to order Applied Ballistics for Long Range Shooting 3rd Edition to hopefully gain a better understanding of how all of this comes in to play.

I was shooting at a 3'x3' steel plate at 800 yards and while I could hit it I was neither accurate nor precise with a ~1.5' 5-shot group, if you can even call it that lol. As the picture above shows it was doing pretty good at 660 yards.

The hardest part as you mentioned is the lack of feedback. Even suppressed you can't here the impacts at that distance.

I found the G7 BC that Bryan Litz published and it's lining up with my experiences.

Attached File

700 - 1182 FPS
731 - 1133 FPS
800 - 1058 FPS

Dropping completely down to subsonic velocities after 700 yards would explain things.

The purpose of this rifle is to be an inexpensive long-range learning tool. I'm not competing with it and don't absolutely have to reach a certain yardage. I'm primarily wanting to push myself and the rifle to our limits to gain a better understanding of how all of this works and to hopefully become a better shooter before upgrading to something like a 6.5 Creedmoor.

Posted: 2/14/2017 1:00:48 PM EDT

[#8]

I'm friends with a few top-level competitive shooters, and have had the chance to rub elbows (and shoot with) some very talented, very smart people.
As such, my contribution here is learned knowledge from men and women who literally travel the world to compete, not necessarily from my own experience (as Ive not shot 223/556 out to its maximum ballistic limit)

Different bullets behave differently in transonic flight, for numerous reasons.
Without actually testing several bullets yourself (aquiring data to support the findings) I'm not sure that anyone can say definitively which bullet will work best in YOUR rifle, in the atmospheric conditions that YOU shoot in.
Then again, considering my lack of experience with 223 at ELR, I could be full of it

Study up on exterior ballistics, it's really fascinating stuff

Posted: 2/14/2017 1:32:54 PM EDT

[#9]

Hammer:

I get fully what you're trying to do ................. I enjoy talking to people that are actually out there shooting!
Not the usual internet ............. well I heard........... I read............

I've been playing around with my 223 AR at a 1000yds right now and so all this is fresh in my mind.

So I looked in my notes:

-The BHA 75's were running mid 2700fps for me.

-I did do some load development with the 75's. I stopped at mid 2700's-- I got the accuracy I wanted.
Now I was using either Varget or H4895.

So I think? suggest? that you try getting your loads (safely) up there?
But run the program and see, under your conditions, how much that will help.....
I'm not sure how much an additional 100fps will push back the sonic barrier.

But with my experiments at 1000yds................... TRY THE 77 TMK's.

Yes............ the main reason I shoot the 80's is due to SR and at 600, you single load. So I use them. After playing with the 77TMK's......... use those! Mag length they rock!

Another thought: at distance........... so starting at 600yds............ your load is critical. I mean the higher ES you have you'll really start seeing the vertical dispersion because of it. ANY wind or wind miscalculation......... you'll see it. The bullets BC and so it's reaction to the wind too. (and my suspicion that the 75H is good until 600 but then has issues).

Finally: Later in the week, I'll post my pics. I challenged you so I need to put up or shut up.

DryFlash: I apologize for calling the OP out, it was well intentioned but just the same............. so to equalize it out.......... I'll call myself out...... :)

PS All my shooting and comments are using a Krieger 20" SR barrel and rifle................. FYI.

Posted: 2/14/2017 8:07:38 PM EDT

[#10]

*WARNING*

The following post contains a possible overload of data, please proceed with caution!

@ch3no2
I've been studying exterior ballistics and as you said it is fascinating stuff if not a little overwhelming at times lol.

@TGH456E
I took no offence from the "call out" and figured that it was in good nature. It seems that most of the people on internet gun forums who talk about their shooting skills are never able to provide proof of said skills. I'd rather post pics of shitty groups and ask for advice on how to make them better than cherry pick one great group out of 100 and act like I'm some sort a billy badass lol.

I just got done working up a new load with the Hornady 75 grain which I will post below.

So you can safely load the 77gr TMK to mag length?

I switched from RL-15 to Ramshot TAC and worked up to 24.4 grains for an average velocity of 2718 fps. Below are the chronograph results. I accidentally loaded 11 instead of ten so I decided to shoot it too.

Attached File

Here are the ballistics using the current atmospheric conditions:

Attached File

Here it is with the average conditions for this time of year (last weekend). I'm also accounting for the increase in ammo temperature

Attached File

Attached File

Upgrading to a better bullet like the 77gr TMK would definitely help.

Attached File

Or the Berger 75gr VLD

Attached File

Posted: 2/16/2017 12:23:51 PM EDT

[#11]

OP:

Here's some reloading info on the 77TMK:

http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_6_42/474932_77-grain-TMK-loads.html

Posted: 2/16/2017 5:25:04 PM EDT

[#12]

Quote History

Quoted:
OP:

Here's some reloading info on the 77TMK:

http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_6_42/474932_77-grain-TMK-loads.html

View Quote

Perfect, thanks!

Posted: 2/16/2017 6:13:44 PM EDT

[#13]

if oyu have a bunch of 75 Hornadys you can load them up to 2850 fps with BLC-2 and 2900 fps with CFE223 according to the Hornady manual for 20 inch NATO chamber.

That will just barely keep you supersonic to 1000, and Mach 1.3 at 700 yards.

Ive shot them ever since they were introduced and with a real world G7 BC of about .182 they need all the velocity you can give them.

I am switching over to the various 77's in my 1-8 but still use them in my one remaining 1-9.

Here is 77 TMK at 1000 yards, 5 x 8 inch group, shooting Creedmoor ammo which clocks 2767 fps in my 20 inch.

The 77 grain SMK fired from same rifle using CBC magtech ammo at 2870 fps is crossing the finish line (probably) about 100 fps faster than speed of sound at my elevation, temperature, humidity. This is about a 15 inch ES.

Difference in group size is due to CBC ammo being 1.25-1.5 MOA ammo not that it is less stable transonic that the TMK (I think). At this range, it's all about calling windage. I've got a lot to learn and can still get valuable experience from 1.5 MOA ammo like this. Especially at just 60 cents a round.

Even with this very fast 77 grain ammo I still need to hold off over 100 inches windage in a full deflection 10 mph. Full deflection 5 mph is not uncommon at my range, but due to nearby hills, you really need to read the wind in three locations and average.

Posted: 2/16/2017 10:46:25 PM EDT

[#14]

Hammer:

Yes... my loads w/ the 77TMK are all magazine length.

Yes.... I've shot them out to 1000yds and they were stable............... But No pictures........... so it didn't happen........... :)

That link should direct you to some loads that might help.

Keep in mind, you really are pushing the 223 at a 1000yds.
Keep your loads safe and understand that me....at 5200ft can get away with ALOT less velocity than you can at 118ft.
There is a limit as to how fast you can push these critters...........

Now on to the pictures I need to post.................

Posted: 2/16/2017 11:01:56 PM EDT

[#15]

So I've shot and like the 75H bullet:

Testing off the bench with this rifle (20" Krieger barrel):

Shot these groups with the 75's:

Reloads:

And BHA 75's:

But I use 80 SMK at 600yds and have been testing the 77TMK's.

These groups were shot with my Service Rifle at the Talladega Marksmanship Park prior to a match.

The Rifle:

First... the 80SMK loads:

The "10" ring is 12" in diameter.. so 2MOA..... shooting irons with a sling.

Then the 77TMK's:

The "c-c 297" is the measurement in mm's from the center points of the 2 outermost shots. So 297mm= 11.692"= 1.9488 MOA.

My best 200yd 77TMK group:

Posted: 2/16/2017 11:03:37 PM EDT

[#16]

Quote History

Quoted:
I googled and 1340 is a number from Bryan Litz. Interesting!

I've shot the 75 BTHP to 800 yards and my target was literally a steel buffalo but I did hit. At 1000 it was hopeless. No feedback from that little bullet.

You need a higher BC and a higher muzzle velocity.

View Quote

That's the beginning of the region considered transonic and where bullets begin losing their minds.

Posted: 2/16/2017 11:45:36 PM EDT

[#17]

I found a 20" TRG and 338LM for $44/box I don't have the room to get transonic now.

Posted: 2/17/2017 2:11:47 AM EDT

[#18]

Quote History

Quoted:
I found a 20" TRG and 338LM for $44/box I don't have the room to get transonic now.

View Quote

This will be me once I get a 6.5 Creedmoor.

Posted: 2/17/2017 11:23:58 AM EDT

[#19]

A little chart I made to tell where transonic starts at what temp.

I think you are going to need to single feed OP.
I shoot 90Smk with my 18", I load them to 2.585" to get 2600fps, I am still into transonic. They are roughly 3.5moa at 1050yds, I think remain fairly stable being 200yds into transonic.
You won't be able to shoot them in an 8twist..

This is from Litz

Attached File

Maybe try a 69gr smk, it is short.

Posted: 2/17/2017 3:53:40 PM EDT

[#20]

Quote History

Quoted:
A little chart I made to tell where transonic starts at what temp.

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y59/glock2027/TRANSONIC_zpsc78ef0e7.jpg

I think you are going to need to single feed OP.
I shoot 90Smk with my 18", I load them to 2.585" to get 2600fps, I am still into transonic. They are roughly 3.5moa at 1050yds, I think remain fairly stable being 200yds into transonic.
You won't be able to shoot them in an 8twist..

This is from Litz
https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/83091/2017-02-17-09-148284.JPG

Maybe try a 69gr smk, it is short.

View Quote

In other words you will just be moving the transition closer to the muzzle.

Posted: 2/17/2017 4:07:42 PM EDT

[#21]

Quote History

Quoted:

In other words you will just be moving the transition closer to the muzzle.

View Quote

Yes, but the if bullet maintains stability it will maintain it's BC and accuracy , while the higher BC, longer bullet that is pitching and yawing due to instability has its BC and accuracy greatly degraded.

Posted: 2/17/2017 9:18:06 PM EDT

[#22]

I think the best solution for me is to simply limit my shooting to 800 yards and stop trying to make a Pinto into a Ferrari

I don't know why I'm so hung up on wanting to hit 1000 yards. It's not like a naked Scarlet Johansen is going to show up and hand me a million bucks and a bj for doing it lol.

Posted: 2/18/2017 12:21:08 AM EDT

[#23]

The .223 is ballistically challenged, so you have to do everything in your power to make it work at 1000 yards. I've competed in NRA Long Range with a spacegun (28" 1:7 barrel the most relevant of many modifications) and can push the 75 gr A-Max seated long to a muzzle velocity of 2930 fps using sane loads; that just barely stays supersonic to 1000 unless the temperature drops below ~40 degrees. With the 75 BTHP at mag length from an 18" barrel, it's just asking too much from the .223. Enjoy your rifle at shorter yardages - as you have found, it can hammer.

Posted: 2/18/2017 1:04:43 AM EDT

[#24]

Quote History

Quoted:
I think the best solution for me is to simply limit my shooting to 800 yards and stop trying to make a Pinto into a Ferrari

I don't know why I'm so hung up on wanting to hit 1000 yards. It's not like a naked Scarlet Johansen is going to show up and hand me a million bucks and a bj for doing it lol.

View Quote

Because it's fun seeing how far you can push it.

And if SJ showed up with an offer like that I'd hate to miss out for lack of shooting ability. Yeah, yeah, phrasing.

(Don't tell the wife)

Posted: 2/18/2017 9:09:05 AM EDT

[#25]

Quote History

Quoted:

Because it's fun seeing how far you can push it.

And if SJ showed up with an offer like that I'd hate to miss out for lack of shooting ability. Yeah, yeah, phrasing.

(Don't tell the wife)

View Quote

Exactly, predictable hits with a 26" 6.5cm at 1k, BFD, the same with an 18" .223, now that is more challenging.

It is fun to try to make things do what they are not suppose to do.

Posted: 2/18/2017 11:45:52 AM EDT

[#26]

Coincidentally the MV you get with your new data above (2718) is exactly what I get with my Re-15 load. Per Strelok it should be supersonic out to 900, but barely. Like you, I'd love to stretch out to 1000 with an AR. I think the 75gr BTHP is a great bullet.

Posted: 2/18/2017 1:46:23 PM EDT

[#27]

Quote History

Quoted:
Yes, but the if bullet maintains stability it will maintain it's BC and accuracy , while the higher BC, longer bullet that is pitching and yawing due to instability has its BC and accuracy greatly degraded.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:

In other words you will just be moving the transition closer to the muzzle.

Yes, but the if bullet maintains stability it will maintain it's BC and accuracy , while the higher BC, longer bullet that is pitching and yawing due to instability has its BC and accuracy greatly degraded.

Once it drops through the speed of sound accuracy is pretty much lost.
It is not going to improve again.

Posted: 2/18/2017 4:36:18 PM EDT

[#28]

Quote History

Quoted:

Once it drops through the speed of sound accuracy is pretty much lost.
It is not going to improve again.

View Quote

Didn't imply or say anything would improve.
The bullet that maintains dynamic stability is better than the bullet that loses it.

Posted: 2/19/2017 1:14:18 PM EDT

[#29]

I worked up a new load earlier this week that pushes the 75gr Hornady to an AV of 2718 fps at 60 degrees air/ammo temp. I also created a ballistic Primary Function chart based off of this current load using 60 degree air/ammo temp for the Super Elevation. Using a powder burn rate calculator I estimated the FPS change per 10 degrees of ammo temp based off of my known velocity at 60 degrees which I planned to confirm when I had the chance.

Yesterday I was able to test the new load and confirm my ballistic chart and powder burn rate. At 80 degrees air/ammo temp my velocity should have increased to an average of 2770 fps. At 82 degrees the average velocity was 2777 which is pretty much right on. My elevation and windage adjustments were dead on as well. This new loading also shot .75 moa which I am more than happy with.

I have a great load, all my charts are dead on, now all that's left is learning to read the damn wind lol. I was having trouble making hits on a 13"x7" target at 400 yards due to the wind blowing 10-15mph then dropping to nothing. It's clear that I still have a lot to learn if I want to make accurate and precise shots at long range.

Posted: 2/19/2017 2:31:01 PM EDT

[#30]

What did you use for the new load, TAC?

Posted: 2/19/2017 2:42:32 PM EDT

[#31]

Quote History

Quoted:
I think the best solution for me is to simply limit my shooting to 800 yards and stop trying to make a Pinto into a Ferrari

I don't know why I'm so hung up on wanting to hit 1000 yards. It's not like a naked Scarlet Johansen is going to show up and hand me a million bucks and a bj for doing it lol.

View Quote

Well, How do you know she won't?
Seriously..................... she could if you do...............

Yes, the 223 is really getting pushed to deliver out to 1000yds.
You can't do anything to adjust the elevation you're on.

Use that "bumped up" load and see how much better it works for you.

I would NOT go lighter, ie 69's, what I found is yes, you get higher velocities but then the issue is the wind. They get pushed around more and The lighter ones seem to get more "squirrelly" at the end of their flight.

If you dont want to reload................... buy a box or 2 of the BHA 77 TMK's and test them out. The BHA ammo, for me, have a higher initial velocity than the Creedmoor.
They will work better for you....................

PS............ Oh and if you have or come across a GOOD 20" barrel........... use it, every fps counts.

Posted: 2/19/2017 3:59:50 PM EDT

[#32]

Quote History

Quoted:
What did you use for the new load, TAC?

View Quote

24.4 grains of TAC in LC and WCC brass.

Posted: 2/19/2017 4:21:26 PM EDT

[#33]

Quote History

Quoted:

Well, How do you know she won't?
Seriously..................... she could if you do...............

I want to believe! Lol.

Yes, the 223 is really getting pushed to deliver out to 1000yds.
You can't do anything to adjust the elevation you're on.

Use that "bumped up" load and see how much better it works for you.

I tried yesterday and found that my biggest issue is wind. It's very unpredictable where I shoot and makes trying to judge it a real PITA, especially for a novice such as myself. It would blow 10-15 mph the go completely still. By the time I would hold off for the wind and pull the trigger it would change.

I would NOT go lighter, ie 69's, what I found is yes, you get higher velocities but then the issue is the wind. They get pushed around more and The lighter ones seem to get more "squirrelly" at the end of their flight.

I plan to stay with at least a 75gr bullet

If you dont want to reload................... buy a box or 2 of the BHA 77 TMK's and test them out. The BHA ammo, for me, have a higher initial velocity than the Creedmoor.
They will work better for you....................

I'm planning to load some 77 TMK's later on. Right now I need to catch a calmer day and see what my current load is doing

PS............ Oh and if you have or come across a GOOD 20" barrel........... use it, every fps counts.

I just got this 18" LaRue Stealth barrel not long ago. I was going to order a 20" from LaRue but came across the 18" in the EE for a great price and went with it. Should have gone with the 20"

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
I think the best solution for me is to simply limit my shooting to 800 yards and stop trying to make a Pinto into a Ferrari

I don't know why I'm so hung up on wanting to hit 1000 yards. It's not like a naked Scarlet Johansen is going to show up and hand me a million bucks and a bj for doing it lol.

Well, How do you know she won't?
Seriously..................... she could if you do...............

I want to believe! Lol.

Yes, the 223 is really getting pushed to deliver out to 1000yds.
You can't do anything to adjust the elevation you're on.

Use that "bumped up" load and see how much better it works for you.

I tried yesterday and found that my biggest issue is wind. It's very unpredictable where I shoot and makes trying to judge it a real PITA, especially for a novice such as myself. It would blow 10-15 mph the go completely still. By the time I would hold off for the wind and pull the trigger it would change.

I would NOT go lighter, ie 69's, what I found is yes, you get higher velocities but then the issue is the wind. They get pushed around more and The lighter ones seem to get more "squirrelly" at the end of their flight.

I plan to stay with at least a 75gr bullet

If you dont want to reload................... buy a box or 2 of the BHA 77 TMK's and test them out. The BHA ammo, for me, have a higher initial velocity than the Creedmoor.
They will work better for you....................

I'm planning to load some 77 TMK's later on. Right now I need to catch a calmer day and see what my current load is doing

PS............ Oh and if you have or come across a GOOD 20" barrel........... use it, every fps counts.

I just got this 18" LaRue Stealth barrel not long ago. I was going to order a 20" from LaRue but came across the 18" in the EE for a great price and went with it. Should have gone with the 20"

Posted: 2/19/2017 6:59:34 PM EDT

[#34]

Quote History

Quoted:
Didn't imply or say anything would improve.
The bullet that maintains dynamic stability is better than the bullet that loses it.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:

Once it drops through the speed of sound accuracy is pretty much lost.
It is not going to improve again.

Didn't imply or say anything would improve.
The bullet that maintains dynamic stability is better than the bullet that loses it.

With a lower BC at max ranges you will lose speed faster.

That means you will go through transonic sooner.

At a shorter range.

Closer to the muzzle.

Posted: 2/20/2017 6:31:21 AM EDT

[#35]

Quote History

Quoted:

With a lower BC at max ranges you will lose speed faster.

That means you will go through transonic sooner.

At a shorter range.

Closer to the muzzle.

View Quote

Yes, the point was the if the higher BC bullet loses stability it is useless as compared to the lower BC bullet that might maintain stability. While the lower BC bullet enters transonic sooner(closer to the muzzle if you insist), if it remains stable, it has better ELR performance.

OP thinks he is losing stability in transonic, many bullet don't lose accuracy into transonic even into subsonic. OP should try a different bullet is the simple answer, predicting which bullet is tougher.

Posted: 2/20/2017 10:56:31 AM EDT

[#36]

Quote History

Quoted:
I googled and 1340 is a number from Bryan Litz. Interesting!

I've shot the 75 BTHP to 800 yards and my target was literally a steel buffalo but I did hit. At 1000 it was hopeless. No feedback from that little bullet.

You need a higher BC and a higher muzzle velocity.

View Quote

Maybe the Nosler 70gr. RDF is in order?

Posted: 2/20/2017 12:59:08 PM EDT

[#37]

Quote History

Quoted:
Yes, the point was the if the higher BC bullet loses stability it is useless as compared to the lower BC bullet that might maintain stability. While the lower BC bullet enters transonic sooner(closer to the muzzle if you insist), if it remains stable, it has better ELR performance.

OP thinks he is losing stability in transonic, many bullet don't lose accuracy into transonic even into subsonic. OP should try a different bullet is the simple answer, predicting which bullet is tougher.

View Quote

OP needs to find a day where the wind isn't consistently going from 0-15mph and see if it actually is the bullet causing the prople or if he just sucks at calling the wind

Posted: 2/21/2017 9:55:14 PM EDT

[#38]

Quote History

Quoted:

Maybe the Nosler 70gr. RDF is in order?

View Quote

This.

Posted: 2/22/2017 6:59:49 AM EDT

[#39]

Quote History

Quoted:

This.

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5163436ce4b0b470bd1fbb00/t/5807d789197aeaf295756382/1476908943772/?format=750w

View Quote

Any personal experience with them being happy at mag length in an AR or are they jump sensitive?

Posted: 2/22/2017 11:00:56 AM EDT

[#40]

Quote History

Quoted:

Any personal experience with them being happy at mag length in an AR or are they jump sensitive?

View Quote

I've heard that they're good to go at mag length, but haven't tried it myself.

This is my next project. If I can make these work for 3-Gun they should give me a significant advantage out to 600 yards as far as flatter trajectory and wind drift. The less I have to think about in terms of trajectory during a match means the more I can think about transitioning to the next target, or how I'm going to work the next array.

Posted: 2/22/2017 11:40:07 AM EDT

[#41]

Quote History

Quoted:

This.

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5163436ce4b0b470bd1fbb00/t/5807d789197aeaf295756382/1476908943772/?format=750w

View Quote

I've been working loads for these right now..................

The issue for the OP is at 1000yds, to remain supersonic, with an 18" barrel at 118' Elevation, he'd need to drive those at around 3000fps.

Thats driving those puppies hard, not impossible or ?

To the others................ testing at mag length....

I'm just now getting usable loads but so far seem good.

I'll post more after the next few days............

One thing though..........at mag length......... they are jammed into that case. The case neck is past the ogive slightly,
so it appears to have a slight, minute gap.
They still shoot but it's odd, if you notice it...............

Posted: 2/22/2017 11:57:34 AM EDT

[#42]

Quote History

Quoted:

This.

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5163436ce4b0b470bd1fbb00/t/5807d789197aeaf295756382/1476908943772/?format=750w

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:

Maybe the Nosler 70gr. RDF is in order?

This.

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5163436ce4b0b470bd1fbb00/t/5807d789197aeaf295756382/1476908943772/?format=750w

I've got 600 of the Hornady 75gr BTHP's and once they're gone I may try these Nosler 70gr.

Posted: 2/22/2017 12:13:17 PM EDT

[#43]

Quote History

Quoted:

I've been working loads for these right now..................

The issue for the OP is at 1000yds, to remain supersonic, with an 18" barrel at 118' Elevation, he'd need to drive those at around 3000fps.

Thats driving those puppies hard, not impossible or ?

To the others................ testing at mag length....

I'm just now getting usable loads but so far seem good.

I'll post more after the next few days............

One thing though..........at mag length......... they are jammed into that case. The case neck is past the ogive slightly,
so it appears to have a slight, minute gap.
They still shoot but it's odd, if you notice it...............

View Quote

I'm no longer concerned with trying to make it to 1000 yards at this time. I've found that I need to concentrate on reading the wind more than anything else.

Posted: 2/22/2017 7:05:44 PM EDT

[#44]

No personal experience... but I like the idea of such a high BC ( claimed ) with a lighter weight... IE they can be reloaded faster.

That said... I haven't seen any Nosler .223 / 5.56 data for them yet.... but Nosler does show data for the .22 Nosler ... and that data shows both the 69gr and 70gr using the same data.

I realize that is quite a stretch to assume that the data for a 69gr .223 / 5.56 would be the same for a 70gr in a .223 / 5.56.

But it does make me wonder....

Posted: 2/22/2017 7:53:45 PM EDT

[#45]

Quote History

Quoted:
If I can make these work for 3-Gun they should give me a significant advantage out to 600 yards as far as flatter trajectory and wind drift. The less I have to think about in terms of trajectory during a match means the more I can think about transitioning to the next target, or how I'm going to work the next array.

View Quote

Exactly where my head is at as well......

Posted: 3/6/2017 12:08:58 PM EDT

[#46]

For those that think the bullet needs to stay supersonic to be accurate.

This was meant to show the value of CDMs where G7s fail going into transonic and subso ic.
It is also a clear example of that a stable bullet that goes transonic closer to the barrel can be better than one that is transonic farther out but loses stability.

These 2 go to subsonic and are still predictable.

Attached File

Posted: 3/7/2017 10:32:27 AM EDT

[#47]

Came here to post what popnfresh has said.

If you can't get a higher BC to keep the bullet from going transonic, you'll have to switch to a bullet with a more predictable transonic trajectory.

These bullets are generally shorter fatter bullets. The 69gr SMK may do it.

Posted: 3/7/2017 2:54:14 PM EDT

[#48]

Quote History

Quoted:
Came here to post what popnfresh has said.

If you can't get a higher BC to keep the bullet from going transonic, you'll have to switch to a bullet with a more predictable transonic trajectory.

These bullets are generally shorter fatter bullets. The 69gr SMK may do it.

View Quote

While some shapes may be better than others none of them are great.

The detachment of Mach waves is a far from a uniformly repeatable event.

We fly airplanes above Mach 1 or below Mach 1.

WE avoid being near that transonic point as much as possible.

As Yeager found out everything smooths out once you get past the 'Sound Barrier.'

Posted: 3/7/2017 3:00:44 PM EDT

[#49]

Quote History

Quoted:

While some shapes may be better than others none of them are great.

The detachment of Mach waves is a far from a uniformly repeatable event.

We fly airplanes above Mach 1 or below Mach 1.

WE avoid being near that transonic point as much as possible.

As Yeager found out everything smooths out once you get past the 'Sound Barrier.'

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
Came here to post what popnfresh has said.

If you can't get a higher BC to keep the bullet from going transonic, you'll have to switch to a bullet with a more predictable transonic trajectory.

These bullets are generally shorter fatter bullets. The 69gr SMK may do it.

While some shapes may be better than others none of them are great.

The detachment of Mach waves is a far from a uniformly repeatable event.

We fly airplanes above Mach 1 or below Mach 1.

WE avoid being near that transonic point as much as possible.

As Yeager found out everything smooths out once you get past the 'Sound Barrier.'

That's where the demons live.

Posted: 3/7/2017 5:24:05 PM EDT

[#50]

I'm sorry to Pop etc.............

But the issue here, to me, is book theory and shooting.

I don't claim to be an HM shooting at 1000yds etc.................

But here's what I've observed shooting at distance.

A common theme is when bullets drop to sub sonic they do weird things............

One will be on, one off, one on call, the other into space somewhere................

Since you can't be sure of how a bullet will react................ keep it supersonic thruout the flight you want.................

But I could be wrong................

So show me (SHOW ME) like pictures or something of a bullet that goes trans sonic and maintains it's accuracy.
Not a book answer................... results.

The other skepticism I have of this is if a Company realized their bullet will stay accurate over the "rough patch" of going trans sonic...........

They should market that puppy as such. But they don't....................... SO?

Please........... I have an open mind but have you got something more than a paper answer?

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - What is the most transonically stable .224 bullet? (Page 1 of 2)

Armory » Reloading

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us