Printable View
A buddy who's just getting into F/TR bought a 12FV from Cabelas. I ran a bunch of test combinations based on previous experience.
Nosler 69CC, 25.0 gr Varget, WSR, LC brass. Seated .005" off the lands, we're getting 5 shot groups in the .2's with one .165".
It definitely shot better after 200 rounds had gone down the tube, but he's more than ready for 600 yd F/TR.
T10 did you have to start from scratch with the load development when you went with the TMK's? I picked up a box of them and tried some already proven powder loads and they didn't do NEARLY as well as the SMK's. Which way did you end up having to go to get comparable results?Quote:
Originally Posted by Texas10
Copterdrvr
H4895 23.8gr, 55gr hornady
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yes, started over for same reason you discovered. Switched powders too, from 8208 to Varget.Quote:
Originally Posted by copterdrvr
I don't think people should abandon what they are comfortable with, but as I've said a few times there is always more than one way to skin a cat. I don't follow much of the professional shooting classes anymore, but frankly it really is irrelevant. Most competitive sports is as much about doing the same thing as the "leader" as anything. Lemmings are reported as following the leader off of cliffs, doesn't mean it was the "right" thing to do.Quote:
Originally Posted by Robinhood
Remember as to the manuals, MOST of them do re-prints of data from someone else, or based off of calculations. Hodgdon as an example, doesn't tell, and from conversations even know that, Superformance is a progressive burning curve powder. Much of their data is still in CUP, which was long ago agreed upon as horribly inaccurate when used over @ 45,000 psi. Yet they continue to print it, so does that mean there isn't a better way of doing it? Of course not. Do they advertise that they contract out much of their current testing? Does it even matter? Different means to an end, not a standard sent down by Moses himself.
The point of this, is that WE the reloader/F-class shooter/etc are the waste market, and ALWAYS have been. If you poll the masses, most will tell you that "Extreme" powders are mystical and their results prove it. They will likely also tell you Varget is better than the rest in a 223, and that H335 and Bl-c(2) are different.
Are Extreme powders unicorns? Of course they are not, and that has been definitively proven many many times. In their specific(or similar application) they do quite well, no two ways about it. Is it superb in the 223? They may well indeed have fine results and are happy, I say Cheers!
Is it more temp stable in the 223 than H335? Absolutely not, and there is repeatable testing papers you can read on this. At least some of the work was done by Dr. Denton Bramwell. That does not mean they cannot get fine accuracy, but Hodgdon's marketing has them bedazzled with B.S. Not unlike Hornady and their "melty tips" shenannigans.
Remember that at one point "we" thought the world was flat, because that's what everyone said. Didn't make it right, but for the masses it also probably didn't matter.
That seems pretty fast for that bullet. What chrono are you using to verify speed?Quote:
Originally Posted by Texas10
And I'd like to see the info showing Varget is no more temp stable than H335. I've seen different tests showing otherwise. Additionally, velocity swings with temp change more with the H335 than with Varget from what I and fellow shooters have seen pressure wise in addition to velocity changes.
http://precisionrifleblog.com/2016/0...s-imr-enduron/
Here are swings from just the "temperature insensitive" powders alone.
I would agree, it does seem fast. FWIW it was a new Caldwell Chrony that belonged to another shooter. Two shots, 3140 and 3126 IIRC, i'd have to check my log. But they are shooting MUCH flatter than SMK load I worked up using 8208XBR. Personally, I don't care so much that they all launch at the same speed, as long as they all go through the same hole...LOL.
From reading on other forums, Varget does not exhibit good temp stability in the 223 like it does with larger calibers. Not mentioned was whether or not that lack of stability was related to lighter 50 to 55 grain bullets, or the heavier 223 bullets that Varget needs to work against.
Maybe some of the "gray beards" here will chime in with some good experience and data to help sort this out. Although i definitely have a gray beard, I don't have decades of experience with hand loading like some others here do.
Apologies if I've offended anyone with my age related comments.
What length barrel?Quote:
Originally Posted by Texas10
Read FAQ #5Quote:
Originally Posted by Newbe
http://www.ramshot.com/faq/
Some of Denton's work can still be read here:
https://www.shootingsoftware.com/tech.htm
It's about application. The Naval Warefare Testing Center tests for temp swings much larger than what Hodgdon says they test at. They also show pressure traces for all of the tests, and actually list number of shots, etc to make it a valid comparison. Most don't think that "temp stable" powders begin to slow down with increased temps(to a point), but they do, and one of the ways you can tell how stable they are in an application.
Again, this is about application. It doesn't mean that Varget won't get you fine accuracy in a 223, it in fact can. But the notion of "it's stable and therefore magic everywhere" is Hooey. Unless you love to cook your ammo in a hot chamber, the whole thing is overblown for most of the fine folks out there in TV land.
When shooting enough to get your barrel hot, keep your bolt open and the cartridge in the magazine(out of the chamber) until you are ready to shoot. If you chamber a round when the barrel is hot and the time between that and pulling the trigger varies, you will see velocity differences.
Sorry for the important omission. 26 in Criterion match, 8 twist model 12 BVSS.Quote:
Originally Posted by Newbe
Well the longer barrel could definitely help you with increased velocity. At least to a point.Quote:
Originally Posted by Texas10
Of course it's not magic everywhere, and for those that don't extend their range, it is probably not an issue unless they're running on the ragged edge at winter time temperatures.Quote:
Originally Posted by darkker
As you know, for long range you want those velocities to be as tight as possible.
Additionally, I'd venture to guess if your not smack dab right in the middle of an accuracy node, a slight variance in pressure and velocity will cause accuracy and poi to shift considerably.
I've read the top link before. The bottom one was new to me and a good read. Thanks for providing those.Quote:
Originally Posted by darkker
Oddly I don't typically find an issue in winter, but heat; but perhaps.Quote:
Originally Posted by Newbe
Another oddity, my favorite very long range load is, by the numbers, not terribly impressive for ES. Now it certainly could be that It's close enough for my skill level, and can't discern the difference. Have a load for my 204 that is spooky accurate to 300, not terribly long I grant you, that has an ES of 105!!
I'm torn on the last point, but from what we've done so far, the dwell time is more critical to the harmonics than the actual pressure and thus velocity. Have several traces where the pressure differential is very minor, but the proximity to a node(as modeling predicts on the PT II) is greatly changed.
For someone who is genuinely curious, the Pressure Trace II system is phenominal at debunking what you *THINK* you know. The unfortunate side effect is that it will leave you with a great many more questions, that don't have simple or easy answers.
55 grain Nosler varmegedden over 25 grains of H335.
I don't have your exact rifle, but rather a F/TR 30" barrel 7 twist.
Best for me is Berger 73 gr with 23.8 Varget
Second best is Sierra Match King 69 with 25.0 Varget
As you know, each rifle is different and will have different result. Good luck and good hunting for a bullet and a charge.