Hi guys,
Just bought new 12fv 223 and need to hand load some 55 60 grain bullets. Let me know where your at thank in advance fellas.
Printable View
Hi guys,
Just bought new 12fv 223 and need to hand load some 55 60 grain bullets. Let me know where your at thank in advance fellas.
That is a 9 twist?
Yep
http://www.savageshooters.com/showth...y-Expectations
http://www.savageshooters.com/showth...-Savage-12-FCV
http://www.predatormastersforums.com...&Number=958684
http://benchrest.com/showthread.php?...-savage-mod-12
http://www.reloadersnest.com/forum/t...?TOPIC_ID=6896
http://www.thehighroad.org/archive/i.../t-495001.html
http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=486143
etc., etc., etc.
That thing called google
How about any start load in any manual you own. It won't be any worse for accuracy than any internet suggestion.
I agree to an extent. I have seen FGMM shoot 1/2 MOA in many rifles. It always helps to tune the load for your stuff though.Quote:
Originally Posted by darkker
I will just tune the load done it many times before thanks.
Thanks for that but there is a reason I asked here...Quote:
Originally Posted by WV1951
The two loads my son has developed so far in his 12FV, 223 are both 53 gain.
53 grain V-Max (excellent B.C.) set about .020 off, and IMR3031 near max load per Hornaday manual. Winchester brass, CCI400
53 gain Sierra HP (p/n 1400) set a bit closer, and 3031 or 8208XBR around 3100 fps. Win brass, CCI400 or BR-4
Model 12FV, Revolution thumb hole stock, bedded with Devcon 10110, Vortex Crossfield II, 4.5-18X40 FFP, Harris bi-pod. Action torqued 45 in lb front, 20 in lb rear. Lift kit on bolt, polished firing pin.
Groups in zero's and low 2's at 100 yds.
With a little set up work, you'd be amazed how well this entry level Cabelas special can shoot, especially if you have young eyes, (I don't).
YMMV.
I've seen it too, but.... Factories don't use canister grade powder like we do. They also don't load powder in Grains, like most do. So not the same thing, or same way to get there.Quote:
Originally Posted by Robinhood
Thanks for you straight answer just the reason I asked. All of the relevant info and more. Btw my eyes aren't what they used to be either lol.Quote:
Originally Posted by Texas10
Odd, I have loaded hundreds of Federal brass, 4064, 210M loads copying the precise charge weights that Federal uses and have achieved the same point of impact and the same level of accuracy. At some point your strict adherence to a set of rules that are based on your experience will have to yield. In some cases, Like me, you are incorrect.Quote:
Originally Posted by darkker
I get very good results with 69gr SMK's over 25gr of Varget. I haven't tried any of the light weight bullets yet.
I make no bones that you can achieve the same velocity, or point of impact; but that isn't because there is only one way to do any given thing. There is only one major ammo company that (at least used to) buy canister grade powder, that is Nosler. And despite their advertising to the contrary, even they load by volume. Take the factory tour, watch them fire -up the Dillon's and load by volume(CC's) of powder.Quote:
Originally Posted by Robinhood
Extruded powder is designed around geometry, and that's how you can control burning rate. Volume will let them compensate for shifting BD between lots.
Since we're discussing factory loads here, one in particular shoots extremely well out of both my bolt 223's . American Eagle 50 grain tipped varmint p/n AE223GTV. This load has put more than a few 3 shot groups in the zero's at 100 yds, and shoots out to 500 yds very well. And those produced today, seem to be some of the best I've seen so far (look for head stamp with two dots on either side of "FC".
This load is not promoted by Federal on their website, you'll not find any reference to it, but it is widely available online and big box stores like Cabelas, Bass pro, Academy Sports.
I have disassembled this round, and reassembled it only to have it shoot like crap. One thing I've noticed is that they use something like Asphalt on the inside of the neck, even though they list no neck sealant on their spec list. (I had to email Federal to get the specs on this load)
I've read that crimping necks really helps with shot to shot consistency, but I never hear about precision shooters crimping their hand loads.
Question for you guys with decades of experience; is the use of asphalt coating inside the neck a trick to improve neck tension or starting pressures consistency?
Why is it that when I use an inertia puller to remove the bullet from this cartridge, then reload it back as it came, and it shoots poorly?
I didn't intend to hijack this thread. Seems to me this is relevant to OP's question.
Sealant could be for a few reasons. Uniform start & water sealant is most likely.
Federal cases are VERY soft, sometimes dangerously so in the head. At any rate the soft case will obturate quicker and seal to the chamber. This is good for accuracy, not so much for case longevity to the reloader.
Ammunition Manufacturers do use canister grade. They blend like Hogdgon does to get the burn rate(within a wide tolerance) their engineer established. It may or may not be the exact burn rate. It is often the cheapest that comes close enough. The big guys also use commercial loading machinery like the Camdex or the ALW Mark L or even bigger stuff. You have probably seen some on display at the shot show. They may use a 1050 for custom or low production number cartridges though.Quote:
Originally Posted by darkker
You repeatedly refute any concept that someone might have a load that would come close to being accurate in other peoples rifle. Reading pages of loading data sorted by Cartridge on one of the most popular sights on the web you will see most loads for accuracy are the rule, not the exception.
I get it, You have a tremendous amount of knowledge with regards to this sport and loading cartridges. Way more than I, but to over complicate things when someone just asks for a little load help is unnecessary. Every top belly shooter weighs their loads. I don't know of one that uses volume, I'm sure he's out there but I don't know him. Maybe the factory does not but in most cases people reload because they can get more accuracy out of weighing their charge than with factory ammunition.
I can understand some rhetoric if the load is over maximum.
I have had good results with 27.8 gr of CFE223 under a 55gr sierra Blitzking, best load in 3 of my 4 223s the other one just wont let go of h335.
Mike
This is why I repeat this, you have also been given incorrect info somewhere along the way. These are important differences to understand.Quote:
Originally Posted by Robinhood
1) No, not as you say "majors", and specifically because of #2.
2) having a wide tolerance is NOT canister grade powder, not is a single burn rate across a lot. Having a narrow tolerance across the lot, is precisely what canister grade is. That way when a random person goes to the store and buys a can O powder with The same name: He can use some load from a random person and not blow himself to kingdom come. He doesn't HAVE to know as much about i:, that Hodgdon doesn't do much of their own testing, that they never made a drop of smokeless, or that Hodgdon is relatively small potatoes as far as a customer of the manufacturers.
3) Again a description of bulk grade, Not canister grade powder. Canister grade powder is a set of tolerances and consistency associated with a brand name. In this country Hodgdon was a key leader in this. They bought train cars of surplussed powder, blended much of that mess into a reliably consistent thing. I've shot kegs of surplussed bulk powder. When I was young and didn't understand, I called General Dynamics to find all about what was to become known as "CFE223". If you call and give them the parent number, you must also identify the original customer and date. Because powder is sold with seemingly endless variations in bulk grade. While it isn't a great idea, you CAN do that with canister grade and have, relatively speaking, little issue. Had I pretended my second batch of SMP-842 was like the first canister, my face and half the rifle would be not attached...
4) BIG, yes. Nosler isn't that, they use Dillons, 650's is what I believe those were.
5) We are close on this, just defining. I believe that any random person online, and any random load found in a reputable manual; are no father apart when it comes to accuracy. There is no one holy grail load, and the rest crap. There are a whole lot of very good loads, a lot of crappy shooters, and an endless stream of people who don't understand that the canister grade, reloading market is a waste market.
6) You will also see that the internet is filled with searches for cat pictures, doesn't mean our society are all desperately seeking a long lost cat. Means people think there is one magic load, and don't actually want to invest time themselves.
7) For the sake of a new reloader, telling him there is no single magic answer; should be freeing. Allowing them to believe there is only one way, one load; that he should ignore any of the safety warnings, should forget about lot variations or understanding, and just load A load.
8) They most certainly are out there, you are correct you just don't follow all the shooting sports; but who does. But this is exactly what I said, go back up: "weighing charges is a handloader invention". I never disputed this. Accurate and cheap scales have been in the hands of the general public, for almost ever. Accurate and inexpensive volume devices have not. Even currently, most on the market have numbers or hashes, very few of which are actually calibrated to a volumetric measurement. But look back in time (if you are old enough) When Olin still produced stuff, their manuals all had VMD numbers, Western provides that currently, with what they resell.
9) That's a mis-guided opinion in my view. People do think, and many times get, accuracy from reloads that best some factory ammo. You were confused about canister grade powder, how many others understand how powder actually works, or for whom?? That I think is the greater underlying issue.
The reloader has always been the waste market, for defense contractors. That is how Hodgy got started. But they (defense contractors) need to crank out billions of rounds per day, and when they get around to it, a semi for hodgy now and then. Billions per day is NOT weighing charges. Extruded powder is built with a very closely held ratio of bulk density to burn rate. The geometry of the grain is what controls the burning rate. So if the BD is abnormally high, the geometry will be such that it will burn slower and not detonate. This is easily taken advantage of when loading volume, but impossible when loading by weight. This is not an accident. Ball powder was fished out, as a quick way to make powder from recycled propellant stocks. Speeds things up in war time, and allows more production with less capacity.
10) If all you told him was a charge weight, how would he know whether or not it's over pressure? If you think you can simply "look at the book and compare" that's partially wrong. Go back to probably the second most searched thing when it comes to reloading, "Lawyer loads". Do you really think that a books max grain loads vary by so much, and yet so very very little in speed; because of lawyers? That reason is because of different burning rates. And since no manual since the very old A-Squared lists components tested, I wonder. Why would someone buy powder from Hodgdon with ZERO listed nominal lot variations, use a book that doesn't list date or lot numbers tested, and think that magically nothing ever changes; the loads magically would be identical. They are not, because things change. There is a very good article in the newest Norma manual about how "sealed" containers will change moisture with storage and how large the burning rate shifts can be. Worth a read for anyone.
Spreading knowledge is a good thing. Simply getting in line and carrying stones up the pyramid like everyone else is only helpful to the pharoh.
Just for the record, You quote listing me as the poster is modified.
When do you think the people writing reloading manuals and the 10's of thousands of reloaders/competitive shooters will catch on?
Outside of bench rest cartridges, can you give me an estimate of the number of top rifle shooters that do not weigh powder?
Out of all of the people that read this forum, how many do you think have abandoned their scales? I admit I have pondered it but the success I have had by weighing powder with the cartridges I choose has me satisfied.
Knowing that every rifle is different with that said, with the Sierra 55 Gr SBT from my Model 12 I ve had outstanding results from the Hodgdon web site OAL @ 2.200. BL-c (2), H335, IMR-3031,4895 & Varget.
With the 1-9 twist rate I have found the 50 & 52 Grainers also produced outstanding results for me. Looking forward to testing the 69 Gr HPBT Match Kings as well as the 75 GR HPBT's
BACK to the question at hand:
24.4 grains of H4895 in Winchester/Lake City/Lapua brass using CCI benchrest primers capped with a Sierra 55 grain Blitzking. This load has MOA/SUBMOA in 5 different AR's and Two bolt action Savages. Similar results with 24.7 grains of Varget in same setup. These loads work in MY GUNS and in reality are very mild loads. To clarify, the Lake City brass is sorted in the sense that it is all 2012 manufacture. On calm mornings I've shot 300 yard groups in the 1.2 inch range with this load in my 12 FLV.
Another load that works great is 24.8 grains of H4895 with a 69 grain Matchking. This group was shot at 300 yards. I use CCI benchrest primers for all of my "accuracy loads". Similar results with 25 grains of Varget.
Forgot to mention rifle used for this group was my Savage 12FLV in a Choate Tactical stock. Mods are extended bolt handle, lift kit (forgot about that!) and Rifle Basix trigger.
[IMG]http://i754.photobucket.com/albums/x...psk7isp8q0.jpg[/IMG]
Quote:
Originally Posted by darkker
I've reloaded the brass saved from the Federal America Eagle loads over a dozen times with no loose pockets, or split necks. But then, I only neck size. I have annealed after a dozen or so loads on some and found them a tad more accurate. Most of these were loaded to max + at one time or another while working up a load, still no looseness or obvious head expansion.
The only reason I toss them is the A.E. made last year were many times too short (1.738) and had flash holes that were consistently off center, sometimes by half a hole! This years brass, identified by two "dots" on either side of the "FC" head stamp, is much more consistent in length averaging 1.742 and the flash holes are well centered.
I am harvesting all this new brass and cycling out the old with "one dot" on either side of the "FC".
Back on subject, I've been using 69grain TMK and 25.9 gr of Varget, making about 3125 FPS, Win Brass, CCI BR-4 or CCI-400 and holding 1/3 moa out to 200 yds (so far). Next test will be 300 yds, then off to the 1000 yd range.
The TMK's shoot much flatter than the SMK, in my experience, but I've shot the SMK's out to 750 yds and found them to be very accurate.
acdame,
Strangely enough I used one of our 40 grain bullets and the recipe on the front of a can of Benchmark. With the bullets seated to magazine length it was a laser beam. I wish all load development was that easy ! lol !
Take care,
Phil Hoham
Berger Bullet Tech
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.