OFFICIAL 6.5 CREEDMOOR PRECISION LOAD RECIPE THREAD (Page 4 of 5)
|
Originally Posted By nukepwr: I know it has been a while but midsouth sells sample packs of Hornady and their "match monsters" Which are said to be rebranded Nosler Custom Competitions. I tried the 123s for my Grendel and they shoot OK. Get about MOA with them out of my AR. |
"Ya brung two too many"
|
Originally Posted By Rob01: H4350 start around 42grns and work up to around 44.5. I loaded some of those 123 gr Noslers using Nosler's "accuracy load" of 42.5 gr of H4350, Fed 210 Primer with OAL at 2.775". I ended up with a 5 shot .743 MOA group at 109 yards. Velocity was 2,846 fps with ES of 22 fps and an SD of 8.5. Not bad for the first try. |
Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.
|
Attached File This was my validation test and my worst group of 6 5-shot strings. Avg: 2727 FPS ES:6 SD: 3.3 Savage 110 Desert Tactical 6.5cm |
|
Originally Posted By cb4017: I loaded some of those 123 gr Noslers using Nosler's "accuracy load" of 42.5 gr of H4350, Fed 210 Primer with OAL at 2.775". I ended up with a 5 shot .743 MOA group at 109 yards. Velocity was 2,846 fps with ES of 22 fps and an SD of 8.5. Not bad for the first try. Nope not bad. Could work up some. Hornady's original loading for the 120 AMAX was 44.5grns of H4350 in Hornady brass so depending on your brass you could get close to that. |
|
my current load: 140 gr Hornady ELD-M 41.7 gr Hodgdon H4350 Federal GMM small rifle Virgin Alpha Munitions brass 2.776" COAL (2.223" to Ogive) rifle Bergara B14-HMR  I am about to start work up on fired brass soon, and play with jump a a bit |
"Admit nothing, deny everything, make counter-accusations" -mi650
Proud Member of Team Ranstad
NRA
Tennessee Squire
RIP WMD
Proud Member of Team Ranstad
NRA
Tennessee Squire
RIP WMD
|
Found another load for my 110 Desert Tac: Attached File Av-2718 ES-20 SD-7.7 |
|
Who is having success with Gas Gun loads. It's been a minute since I have reloaded for my AR10 with 18" criterion barrel. I was using 130 grain TMKs and IMR 4350/4451 powder, hornady brass, and CCI BR4 primers. Has anyone else worked up a load with 130 Game Changers or 130 TMKs? |
|
I’m working on finding a load for my Bergara B14 Ridge, and am not impressed with my H4350 results so far. All shots are suppressed with a TBAC Ultra 5 Lapua Small Primer Cases H4350 CCI BR-4 Primers Nosler 140 gr. Accubond Bullets 2.300” Ogive I saw some pressure signs around 40.6 grains, so I did the test below today. I’m not impressed with the velocity variations, and am unsure about where to go next. My plan is to load some at 39.7 and 40.3 and see if I see any improvement. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated. Attached File |
|
Originally Posted By pointman66: I'm working on finding a load for my Bergara B14 Ridge, and am not impressed with my H4350 results so far. All shots are suppressed with a TBAC Ultra 5 Lapua Small Primer Cases H4350 CCI BR-4 Primers Nosler 140 gr. Accubond Bullets 2.300" Ogive I saw some pressure signs around 40.6 grains, so I did the test below today. I'm not impressed with the velocity variations, and am unsure about where to go next. My plan is to load some at 39.7 and 40.3 and see if I see any improvement. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated. https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/335613/C7CCC092-8283-4473-8409-EE57259F3C1B_jpe-1460402.JPG |
|
Attached File Still working on a good StaBall load. 44.5 140 Hornady .6 MOA 2860 avg SD 10 ES 23 This may be as good as it gets. Perhaps more playing with seating depth? I’m 20 off the lands now. |
|
Originally Posted By Rob01: The 147 ELD-M is a good choice but depends on the needs and the rifle. Originally Posted By Rob01: Originally Posted By VooDoo3dfx: Is the general consensus the hornady 147 is still the caliber to go with for most ranges? Somebody awhile ago posted some issues with their rounds. The 147 ELD-M is a good choice but depends on the needs and the rifle. A bit late, but what needs would that be? |
|
Originally Posted By Rob01: Wanting a higher BC if you wanted to keep your wind calls lower at longer ranges. If you are just shooting 200 yards then the 147's advantages wouldn't be needed. Originally Posted By Rob01: Originally Posted By VooDoo3dfx: A bit late, but what needs would that be? Wanting a higher BC if you wanted to keep your wind calls lower at longer ranges. If you are just shooting 200 yards then the 147's advantages wouldn't be needed. What is the disadvantage of using the 147 then? |
|
Originally Posted By VooDoo3dfx: What is the disadvantage of using the 147 then? At shorter ranges? No real disadvantage except lower velocity if you wanted to keep the trajectory flatter. Even for some at longer ranges this is something they would rather give up the higher BC to get some more velocity. All comes down to how the rifle is set up also. Short barrel then you might not gain much if any advantage in the 147 compared to someone with a longer barrel being able to get them to higher velocities. |
|
Originally Posted By Rob01: At shorter ranges? No real disadvantage except lower velocity if you wanted to keep the trajectory flatter. Even for some at longer ranges this is something they would rather give up the higher BC to get some more velocity. All comes down to how the rifle is set up also. Short barrel then you might not gain much if any advantage in the 147 compared to someone with a longer barrel being able to get them to higher velocities. Originally Posted By Rob01: Originally Posted By VooDoo3dfx: What is the disadvantage of using the 147 then? At shorter ranges? No real disadvantage except lower velocity if you wanted to keep the trajectory flatter. Even for some at longer ranges this is something they would rather give up the higher BC to get some more velocity. All comes down to how the rifle is set up also. Short barrel then you might not gain much if any advantage in the 147 compared to someone with a longer barrel being able to get them to higher velocities. Barrel is 24 or 26 inches. |
| Buy a box of each and try them. 24"+ length then the 147 can get decent velocity but don't plan to gain a lot on the 140s. You will gain some and the longer the barrel the more you will gain as you can get more velocity. Honestly my favorite weight for the Creedmoor has been the 140s. If i had to pick one bullet that would be the one. |
|
In my previous 6.5 (savage 10t-SR) I had a few .4 groups with 142 SMK and h4350, i primarily ran 147 eld that were consistent .5” with h4350 I do not recall the exact charge. My new 6.5 (Bergara pro hmr) I have a box of 140 Berger vld target, and 142 smk as well as H4350 and RL16 to try out. |
|
142 SMK 41.1 gr of H4350 Coal-ogive 2.254 (.010 from the lands in my rifle) CCI BR4 I have tried berger 140 vld and the 142 smk. Most are under .5 but the smk make these nice little groups. 3 shots at 100 today Attached File |
|
Originally Posted By VooDoo3dfx: Can someone tell me the starting load for a Berger 140 Grain Match Hybrid Target is? And the max load as well? Using H4350 powder with Federal 210M primers in a Hornady case. I’d start around 40grn and work up. Most find a load between 41-42grns. Hodgdon lists min/max on their site for 140s if you wanted that info. http://www.hodgdonreloading.com/data/rifle |
|
Originally Posted By Rob01: I’d start around 40grn and work up. Most find a load between 41-42grns. Hodgdon lists min/max on their site for 140s if you wanted that info. http://www.hodgdonreloading.com/data/rifle Originally Posted By Rob01: Originally Posted By VooDoo3dfx: Can someone tell me the starting load for a Berger 140 Grain Match Hybrid Target is? And the max load as well? Using H4350 powder with Federal 210M primers in a Hornady case. I’d start around 40grn and work up. Most find a load between 41-42grns. Hodgdon lists min/max on their site for 140s if you wanted that info. http://www.hodgdonreloading.com/data/rifle Thanks. I was only looking at Bergers site. |
|
OK. Can anybody explain the OAL length and the 'jump' concept in crayon eating terms for my sake?  I have the stoney point OAL tool, I understand the meeting of the lands and backing up, but now there is chat of the OAL isnt as important as the gap between the bullet and lands? Help?
|
Watch Erik’s series on chasing the lands. Chasing the lands is STUPID! Don't do it. |
this shit will not stop until enough people REFUSE TO COMPLY
|
Originally Posted By NeverBlue: Watch Erik’s series on chasing the lands.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oRXlCG9YZbQThank you. |
|
Originally Posted By VooDoo3dfx: https://precisionrifleblog.com/2020/03/29/bullet-jump-load-development/?fbclid=IwAR1Dc_DizLDw_Y4hTRrT_PmM8ytbl2Q7B4eSp9AjxxxX8m-U_gUuXUsqxyo Thoughts? I read that a while back and thought it was a great article. I don't think it applies to me much as I only shoot a few hundred rounds a year long range, so I don't mind re-optimizing my jump every year or so as the lands wear down. I can see where that article would be very important to a PRS or F class shooter though who shoot thousands of rounds a year. I also think it depends on bullet design. The VLD style bullets are supposedly very dependent on the jump while bullets with a tangent ogive (or hybrid shape) are not nearly as dependent. I actually prefer the hybrid style bullets because I prefer not to chase the jump and worry about changes over time. I don't mind sacrificing some in BC for that benefit. Here's a good article about the different bullet profiles. https://www.accurateshooter.com/ballistics/tangent-vs-secant-vs-hybrid-ogive-bullets/ |
NRA Life Member
Second Amendment Foundation Member
FBHO Member
Second Amendment Foundation Member
FBHO Member
|
Originally Posted By drfroglegs: I read that a while back and thought it was a great article. I don't think it applies to me much as I only shoot a few hundred rounds a year long range, so I don't mind re-optimizing my jump every year or so as the lands wear down. I can see where that article would be very important to a PRS or F class shooter though who shoot thousands of rounds a year. I also think it depends on bullet design. The VLD style bullets are supposedly very dependent on the jump while bullets with a tangent ogive (or hybrid shape) are not nearly as dependent. I actually prefer the hybrid style bullets because I prefer not to chase the jump and worry about changes over time. I don't mind sacrificing some in BC for that benefit. Here's a good article about the different bullet profiles. https://www.accurateshooter.com/ballistics/tangent-vs-secant-vs-hybrid-ogive-bullets/ Originally Posted By drfroglegs: Originally Posted By VooDoo3dfx: https://precisionrifleblog.com/2020/03/29/bullet-jump-load-development/?fbclid=IwAR1Dc_DizLDw_Y4hTRrT_PmM8ytbl2Q7B4eSp9AjxxxX8m-U_gUuXUsqxyo Thoughts? I read that a while back and thought it was a great article. I don't think it applies to me much as I only shoot a few hundred rounds a year long range, so I don't mind re-optimizing my jump every year or so as the lands wear down. I can see where that article would be very important to a PRS or F class shooter though who shoot thousands of rounds a year. I also think it depends on bullet design. The VLD style bullets are supposedly very dependent on the jump while bullets with a tangent ogive (or hybrid shape) are not nearly as dependent. I actually prefer the hybrid style bullets because I prefer not to chase the jump and worry about changes over time. I don't mind sacrificing some in BC for that benefit. Here's a good article about the different bullet profiles. https://www.accurateshooter.com/ballistics/tangent-vs-secant-vs-hybrid-ogive-bullets/ Thank you. So, with that being said, and because I use 140 hybrids, how should I calculate seating depth? Take the .0020 off from touching the lands to start with? Magazine size? |
|
Originally Posted By VooDoo3dfx: Thank you. So, with that being said, and because I use 140 hybrids, how should I calculate seating depth? Take the .0020 off from touching the lands to start with? Magazine size? I usually go 0.020" off the lands and start there. Maybe load a 5rd group at 0.02", 0.03", 0.04", 0.05", 0.06", and 0.07" off the lands to see if you can find a point where you see an improved group. You may find in a certain range it doesn't make that much of a difference, if so I would go to the middle of that range. Really, it all boils down to how much testing do you want to do and what is the level of "good enough". If I can get half moa loading at 0.02" off the lands I don't even mess with the jump optimization... I cant really shoot any better than that anyways so any results are likely not even statistically significant. |
NRA Life Member
Second Amendment Foundation Member
FBHO Member
Second Amendment Foundation Member
FBHO Member
|
Originally Posted By VooDoo3dfx: Thank you. So, with that being said, and because I use 140 hybrids, how should I calculate seating depth? Take the .0020 off from touching the lands to start with? Magazine size? Yes Just because it is written somewhere that X works - you don't know until you do it. Load and shoot. I have not fired a factory round in my 6.5CM, reloads from the start and at first I was 0.040" off lands just because. Now at 0.023 off just because 0.020 off puts the nose of ELDs just about touching the mag. At 0.020 the BTHP match bullets and the 0.023 ELD shoot "better". The biggest factor is ME! Some days I do fantastic and other days I cannot maintain consistent anything. I would say load to 0.002 -0.004 less than mag length and see what the load does, like a couple hundred rounds. Others will recommend something else and they are as right as me. Focus more on you (or: check weld, bipod load or not, grip or not, trigger press, scope parallax, etc). 470 rounds in and I cannot measure appreciable erosion. Is it there? Sure. Do I care? Not right now because I cannot outshoot my rifle and load. |
|
Originally Posted By drfroglegs: I usually go 0.020" off the lands and start there. Maybe load a 5rd group at 0.02", 0.03", 0.04", 0.05", 0.06", and 0.07" off the lands to see if you can find a point where you see an improved group. You may find in a certain range it doesn't make that much of a difference, if so I would go to the middle of that range. Really, it all boils down to how much testing do you want to do and what is the level of "good enough". If I can get half moa loading at 0.02" off the lands I don't even mess with the jump optimization... I cant really shoot any better than that anyways so any results are likely not even statistically significant. Originally Posted By drfroglegs: Originally Posted By VooDoo3dfx: Thank you. So, with that being said, and because I use 140 hybrids, how should I calculate seating depth? Take the .0020 off from touching the lands to start with? Magazine size? I usually go 0.020" off the lands and start there. Maybe load a 5rd group at 0.02", 0.03", 0.04", 0.05", 0.06", and 0.07" off the lands to see if you can find a point where you see an improved group. You may find in a certain range it doesn't make that much of a difference, if so I would go to the middle of that range. Really, it all boils down to how much testing do you want to do and what is the level of "good enough". If I can get half moa loading at 0.02" off the lands I don't even mess with the jump optimization... I cant really shoot any better than that anyways so any results are likely not even statistically significant. For me, there has to be a happy medium. I have been reading blogs, articles and forum posts of people who weigh every brass, every bullet, take measurements of how much erosion there is every hundred or so rounds.. that doesn't seem fun to me, just work, My goal is to find a round I can hit at least .5 MOA at 100 yards, and extend that MOA up into the 1000 yard range when i get the opportunity. Beyond that, this is supposed to be a fun hobby, not a job. |
|
Originally Posted By RWEIII: Yes Just because it is written somewhere that X works - you don't know until you do it. Load and shoot. I have not fired a factory round in my 6.5CM, reloads from the start and at first I was 0.040" off lands just because. Now at 0.023 off just because 0.020 off puts the nose of ELDs just about touching the mag. At 0.020 the BTHP match bullets and the 0.023 ELD shoot "better". The biggest factor is ME! Some days I do fantastic and other days I cannot maintain consistent anything. I would say load to 0.002 -0.004 less than mag length and see what the load does, like a couple hundred rounds. Others will recommend something else and they are as right as me. Focus more on you (or: check weld, bipod load or not, grip or not, trigger press, scope parallax, etc). 470 rounds in and I cannot measure appreciable erosion. Is it there? Sure. Do I care? Not right now because I cannot outshoot my rifle and load. Originally Posted By RWEIII: Originally Posted By VooDoo3dfx: Thank you. So, with that being said, and because I use 140 hybrids, how should I calculate seating depth? Take the .0020 off from touching the lands to start with? Magazine size? Yes Just because it is written somewhere that X works - you don't know until you do it. Load and shoot. I have not fired a factory round in my 6.5CM, reloads from the start and at first I was 0.040" off lands just because. Now at 0.023 off just because 0.020 off puts the nose of ELDs just about touching the mag. At 0.020 the BTHP match bullets and the 0.023 ELD shoot "better". The biggest factor is ME! Some days I do fantastic and other days I cannot maintain consistent anything. I would say load to 0.002 -0.004 less than mag length and see what the load does, like a couple hundred rounds. Others will recommend something else and they are as right as me. Focus more on you (or: check weld, bipod load or not, grip or not, trigger press, scope parallax, etc). 470 rounds in and I cannot measure appreciable erosion. Is it there? Sure. Do I care? Not right now because I cannot outshoot my rifle and load. Makes sense. So, is it better to find the max powder load first then fine tune it with seating depth? Last time i did a load up was for my .308, and that was 12 years ago. I don't quite remember what the process was. |
|
For longer range shooting you MAY want a higher velocity. Velocity isn't everything though. You also want low ES and precision. Then worry about COAL/OAL. IMO you have to find a balance between you, your rifle, and load. Load, shoot, make notes in a book - every time. Then see what works after you have data on your gear and skills. Edit: AND HAVE FUN!!! |
|
Originally Posted By VooDoo3dfx: New brass out of the bag, how many fully resize it? Or just pop in the primer and go through the process? My reloads are neck sized only. But even so I still do a full resize on new brass to to make sure everything (mainly the shoulder and neck) are as close to each other as they can be, and as above I also uniform the flash holes - it doesn't take long. After the first shot I of course do the whole shebang on the case when reloading. |
"What contemptible scoundrel has stolen the cork to my lunch!"
~ W.C. Fields ~
"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free and live in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
~ Thomas Jefferson ~
~ W.C. Fields ~
"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free and live in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
~ Thomas Jefferson ~
|
Originally Posted By VooDoo3dfx: Using the stoney point OAL gauge, and after doing it about 20 times to make sure I wasn't messing up, my length was 2.936 with taking off .020 making it 2.916. Is that length... unusual? What bullet? The 147 eld? If so that’s a little long but not bad. With a saami chamber they are right about 2.890” to the lands. |
|
Originally Posted By Rob01: What bullet? The 147 eld? If so that’s a little long but not bad. With a saami chamber they are right about 2.890” to the lands. Originally Posted By Rob01: Originally Posted By VooDoo3dfx: Using the stoney point OAL gauge, and after doing it about 20 times to make sure I wasn't messing up, my length was 2.936 with taking off .020 making it 2.916. Is that length... unusual? What bullet? The 147 eld? If so that’s a little long but not bad. With a saami chamber they are right about 2.890” to the lands. 140 berger hybrid https://www.snipershide.com/shooting/threads/6-5mm-140g-berger-hybrid-seating-depth-question.209154/ Looks like they do run a bit long. |
|
Originally Posted By Rob01: Can’t help there but sounds a little long in the freebore. My 140 elds are at 2.870” to lands. Hybrids don’t mind jump so you should be ok moving it back to fit in mags. Until I upgrade my stock to the AI one, I dont use mags. I think their max is 2.880"? So, should I just make it 2.880 and work from there? |
|
Originally Posted By VooDoo3dfx: Until I upgrade my stock to the AI one, I dont use mags. I think their max is 2.880"? So, should I just make it 2.880 and work from there? Standard AICS mags can go to about there but I don't load anything over 2.860" to make sure they feed reliably. Accurate Mag make a magazine without the front binder plate and it can take up to 2.950". You will have to notch back the feed ramp on the action though. You might have to do it with the standard mags too. |
|
Originally Posted By Rob01: Standard AICS mags can go to about there but I don't load anything over 2.860" to make sure they feed reliably. Accurate Mag make a magazine without the front binder plate and it can take up to 2.950". You will have to notch back the feed ramp on the action though. You might have to do it with the standard mags too. Originally Posted By Rob01: Originally Posted By VooDoo3dfx: Until I upgrade my stock to the AI one, I dont use mags. I think their max is 2.880"? So, should I just make it 2.880 and work from there? Standard AICS mags can go to about there but I don't load anything over 2.860" to make sure they feed reliably. Accurate Mag make a magazine without the front binder plate and it can take up to 2.950". You will have to notch back the feed ramp on the action though. You might have to do it with the standard mags too. OK, thanks. As that won't be until next year, should I just stick with my measurement at .020 off the lands or start at mag length and find a sweet spot under that length? |