Reloading help - 6.5 PRC

[TurboSportTSi]

Hi All,

I've been working up loads for a new rifle and am having a heck of a time. At this point, I don't know where to go next and am looking for advice. With components being scarce, I would like to avoid as much shot-in-the-dark testing as I can.

Rifle: Christensen Arms Traverse w/ 24" cf barrel. Break-in completed per mfg instructions - roughly 150rds on the barrel now. I bought this rifle to "easy button" load dev, since it's somewhat high end for an off the shelf rig. It is proving to be the worst shooting rifle I've ever owned! I can *barely* get ~1' groups, so I can't really send it back for a rebarrel...
Scope: NF NXS 2.5-10x42 in Talley UL mounts (2-piece mounts are not my favorite, but had trouble finding mounts low enough)
Bullet: 124 gr Hammer Hunter
Brass: Nosler factory seconds, pared down & weight sorted to remove defects and significant outliers (all within ~2.5% case weight). 1x fired & annealed. FL sized, 2 thou neck tension, 2 thou shoulder bump.
Shooter: Capable of 1/2 - 3/4 MOA consistently with my semi-custom 6.5 CM & handloads. Have shot slightly smaller groups, but not with any regularity - UNK if that is rifle-related or not (budget build).

Using Hammer Hunter 124 gr bullets and would like to stick with them if possible. This rifle will be for hunting use only. I used to work up loads for various bullets & powders for different purposes and it became a PITA so I am keeping it simple with this rig. I went with these bullets partly because they are very expensive and thus have no availability issues, which is perfect for a hunting rifle...and partly because I kept reading that load workups were so easy because they are so consistent and insensitive to seating depth.

I have tried H1000 with pretty dismal results, then read that Hammers typically work best with a faster powder due to the design of their bearing surfaces, so I tried some Superformance that I had on hand, with equally dismal results. I'm having trouble interpreting the data and see nothing that warrants further investigation. I have nothing in between, in terms of burn rate and I can't just go out and buy a pound of RL23 or similar.

I have an optical chrony that has proved to be a pain in the rear and so I generally don't use it, so I have no velocity data for the H1000 load dev, but I wised up and tried it again for the Superformance dev and it worked fairly well. I usually use the OCW method, focusing on location of group centers relative to POA and not on group size. The trouble is, I can't discount group size completely, and the velocity nodes don't coincide at all with consistent group size and deviation from POA.

H1000 resulted in wild groups (like 2+ inches), then one random 5-shot group that had 4 shots touching, with one flyer about a half inch away. Moving on...

Superformance never really seemed to hit a velocity node but had multiple groups at around 1". Trying to conserve components, I only shot 2 strings, round robin style, before calling it quits. After graphing the data, I went back to the range later that day to shoot the 3rd string, which resulted in much higher velocity, but still reinforced the general velocity trend, save for a few chrony errors as light was fading. Could be that this kind of variation due to temp means that this powder is not for me.

My analysis indicates that 55.4gr is likely the center of a reasonably stable node and the 1st shot at that charge weight was a fluke. Both the second and third strings indicate a node there. The trouble is, the 55.7 & 56.0 groups were fairly consistent and make me want to split the difference between those two and test seating depth, but the velocity seems to be increasing steadily at that point.

What would you do? Any advice?

 

[Harvey_NW]

I wouldn't blame any components yet, I think you could be battling rifle issues as well but I see some inconsistencies in your process. In the beginning you jump your charge weight by .5, then down to .3, then back up to .4. Consistency is key, tighter increments will usually make changes in results more identifiable. I also prefer not to solely rely on OCW style testing because it can land you with a load that is harmonically tuned and shoots bugholes at 100, but has an ES of 70. Or if you're not in a jump node it makes it really hard to identify anything.

If this were my issue, I would start with the rifle. Take it apart completely for inspection making sure there's zero contact in the barrel channel or anywhere else that may mess with harmonics, check out the bed, etc. Clean and degrease all screws/bolts, blue loctite, 25 in/lbs on the Talley bases, whatever the spec and sequence is for the action bolts.

When it comes to load development with high bc bullets there's tons of data proving the most forgiving accuracy nodes are .050"+ off the lands, so I usually start at 50 or where the bottom edge of the bearing surface is near the neck/shoulder junction if trying to optimize case capacity with a smaller granule powder.

I shoot a 10-15 total single shot ladder loaded to a grain or so over max and in .3gr increments to see what kind of numbers come up and identify where pressure is (*NOTE* I don't put much merit into this test, this is simply to identify where pressure is and if there's a potential velocity node that pops up. In my experience once you adjust seating depth for accuracy, it can potentially change those nodes if you're on the edge, the fine tuning will be done later.) At this point if you identify a velocity node or even a velocity you'd like to run, do a seating depth test loading 3 of each CBTO working in .003-.005" increments over about .025-0.030". Jump nodes print in a sine wave format so you should see the groups open up and tighten back up in this test.

At this point you should have an identifiable combo. Load 3 at each charge in either the velocity node you identified in the ladder, or at whatever charge the velocity you want to be was at, covering about .5gr in .1gr increments.

You can further refine this by Initially shooting a big jump seating depth test in .020-.030" increments to identify where to start, but I tailor my loads from where I want to start based on mag length, case density, etc. and it's always worked. This will usually land me with a .5MOA load with a low ES with every combo I've used. If that sucker doesn't give you some identifiable results using that process, I'd be sending it to a smith. This is just my .02, YMMV.

 

[JakeSCH]

Those are some crazy speeds and a lot of great information above. I get similar speed with RL26 but H1000 was much slower for me.

I personally would grab 56.6 gr and do a seating depth change...I would also grab a lee crimp die.

 

[TurboSportTSi]

I wouldn't blame any components yet, I think you could be battling rifle issues as well but I see some inconsistencies in your process. In the beginning you jump your charge weight by .5, then down to .3, then back up to .4. Consistency is key, tighter increments will usually make changes in results more identifiable. I also prefer not to solely rely on OCW style testing because it can land you with a load that is harmonically tuned and shoots bugholes at 100, but has an ES of 70. Or if you're not in a jump node it makes it really hard to identify anything.

If this were my issue, I would start with the rifle. Take it apart completely for inspection making sure there's zero contact in the barrel channel or anywhere else that may mess with harmonics, check out the bed, etc. Clean and degrease all screws/bolts, blue loctite, 25 in/lbs on the Talley bases, whatever the spec and sequence is for the action bolts.

When it comes to load development with high bc bullets there's tons of data proving the most forgiving accuracy nodes are .050"+ off the lands, so I usually start at 50 or where the bottom edge of the bearing surface is near the neck/shoulder junction if trying to optimize case capacity with a smaller granule powder.

I shoot a 10-15 total single shot ladder loaded to a grain or so over max and in .3gr increments to see what kind of numbers come up and identify where pressure is (*NOTE* I don't put much merit into this test, this is simply to identify where pressure is and if there's a potential velocity node that pops up. In my experience once you adjust seating depth for accuracy, it can potentially change those nodes if you're on the edge, the fine tuning will be done later.) At this point if you identify a velocity node or even a velocity you'd like to run, do a seating depth test loading 3 of each CBTO working in .003-.005" increments over about .025-0.030". Jump nodes print in a sine wave format so you should see the groups open up and tighten back up in this test.

At this point you should have an identifiable combo. Load 3 at each charge in either the velocity node you identified in the ladder, or at whatever charge the velocity you want to be was at, covering about .5gr in .1gr increments.

You can further refine this by Initially shooting a big jump seating depth test in .020-.030" increments to identify where to start, but I tailor my loads from where I want to start based on mag length, case density, etc. and it's always worked. This will usually land me with a .5MOA load with a low ES with every combo I've used. If that sucker doesn't give you some identifiable results using that process, I'd be sending it to a smith. This is just my .02, YMMV.

First off, wow...thank you for taking the time to read my wall of text and give such a thoughtful reply!

I agree that there may be a rifle issue...or it could just be super picky, which is fine with me, but it can't be picky to the point that I can't find something that works. Not that I've tried everything, but I certainly don't see a good place to really dive in after 2 vastly different powders.

I have take the rifle apart and checked it all out, retorqued everything and checked for interference. I ended up sanding the barrel channel a bit on one side because it was off-center and pretty close (a dollar bill was tight), but it didn't take a ton off. I should probably hog it out a lot further than I did. As I understand, CA is notorious for bare minimum bedding jobs. They are "spot bedded" at the factory, whatever that means. I do plan to bed the rifle properly and center it in the stock, but didn't want to mess with it too much until I decide it's a keeper. Void the warranty kind of thing.

Good catch on the charge weight inconsistency! I caught that .4 increment before I went to the range but figured it wasn't enough of a problem to fuss with at that point. When I first started out reloading, I followed the OCW method to a T, percentages and all, but after doing that for a while I settled on half grain increments at the low end (if I can only get a good load at minimum charge, I'm changing powders!) and .3 for the rest, as that seemed to be what it generally worked out to. I think that method goes down to 1% or something for the last few charge weights, or ~0.2gr at this level, but I'm not interested in running a load that close to max, so I don't feel the need to explore the razor's edge. I may switch to a single shot ladder style test like you do, to save components. 3-shot groups to find a velocity node is a waste. After doing this for 3 different cartridges now, I don't know that I believe in the OCW method. It hasn't once been as "textbook" as it is touted to be and probably confuses things even more, at least in my experience. I only used it initially because I didn't have a chronograph.

I agree with your assessment of 0.050 jump being a good starting point for most modern bullets. I see 0.040 being recommended quite a bit as well - similar enough. I actually landed at 100 jump based on my tests with H1000, but realize that may or may not translate at all for Superformance so I just stuck with it, knowing I would be doing a seating depth test next anyway, once I identify a node and decide to proceed with this powder (not that I have much choice).

I've never done a seating depth test as fine as you have - I generally go in 40 thou increments to start, then hone in on a depth in 10 thou increments, but I suppose it doesn't hurt to fine tune a little more.

I could post pics of my H1000 groups if you'd like (no chrony data) for comparison, but if you were in my shoes would you continue down the Superformance road? Change bullets?

 

[TurboSportTSi]

Those are some crazy speeds and a lot of great information above. I get similar speed with RL26 but H1000 was much slower for me.

I personally would grab 56.6 gr and do a seating depth change...I would also grab a lee crimp die.

Yes, the speeds are pretty incredible. I about fell off the shooting bench stool when I saw it break 3400 fps! I really don't care too much about getting every last fps, but coming from a short-barreled 6.5 CM and an over-hyped 7 LRM, I'm happy to see some real velocity. A solid jump over my CM for sure.

Any particular reason why you would choose 56.6 gr?

Also, I might actually have a Lee factory crimp die in my 6.5 CM die set...not sure if that is cartridge specific or just caliber specific, but I'm going to go check. If I do have one, I've never used it. I have a Lee's collet neck sizing die for my CM, but bushing dies for everything else, including this 6.5 PRC. Being able to control neck tension shouldn't be a problem with the right bushing. Out of curiosity, why would I use the crimp die?

 

[JakeSCH]

Yes, the speeds are pretty incredible. I about fell off the shooting bench stool when I saw it break 3400 fps! I really don't care too much about getting every last fps, but coming from a short-barreled 6.5 CM and an over-hyped 7 LRM, I'm happy to see some real velocity. A solid jump over my CM for sure.

Any particular reason why you would choose 56.6 gr?

Also, I might actually have a Lee factory crimp die in my 6.5 CM die set...not sure if that is cartridge specific or just caliber specific, but I'm going to go check. If I do have one, I've never used it. I have a Lee's collet neck sizing die for my CM, but bushing dies for everything else, including this 6.5 PRC. Being able to control neck tension shouldn't be a problem with the right bushing. Out of curiosity, why would I use the crimp die?

I guess it depends on how much you trust the third string, but utilizing all three strings 56.6 appears to be a velocity node (lowest ES / SD), however if you do not trust 3rd string, I would probably choose 57.0. Simple seating depth changes can be 1" groups to .3" groups.

I recommend the crimp, because a lot of guys whose life revolve around hammer bullets do it. They put the end of the case in a valley and crimp it down. They say due to the shape of parabolic bands, it helps with consistency similar to neck tension...but that hammers require more than other bullets.

Check out the hammertime forum and they walk through it. I am just getting into it, no expert at crimping but it sounds like it has a good impact on these bullets.

 

[Ladd]

I would check another thing on your rifle. The internal mag box in a Christensen Arms rifle has to fit just right with the bottom metal or else the box gets wedged. Make sure it is free floating and not binding.

My first Ridgeline shot really well with only the spot bedding but I still go further and bed most of the action minus around the trigger area. I've setup several Ridgelines and an ELR rifle and have been able to get them to shoot better than advertised. I don't have any experience with your bullet of choice but that might also be something to consider. My 6.5 PRCs shoot heavy for caliber bullets really well. My 6.5 PRC Christensen Arms Ridgeline is one I'll keep for a long time. I have it's replacement barrel ready to go when the original goes.

 

[Harvey_NW]

First off, wow...thank you for taking the time to read my wall of text and give such a thoughtful reply!

I agree that there may be a rifle issue...or it could just be super picky, which is fine with me, but it can't be picky to the point that I can't find something that works. Not that I've tried everything, but I certainly don't see a good place to really dive in after 2 vastly different powders.

I have take the rifle apart and checked it all out, retorqued everything and checked for interference. I ended up sanding the barrel channel a bit on one side because it was off-center and pretty close (a dollar bill was tight), but it didn't take a ton off. I should probably hog it out a lot further than I did. As I understand, CA is notorious for bare minimum bedding jobs. They are "spot bedded" at the factory, whatever that means. I do plan to bed the rifle properly and center it in the stock, but didn't want to mess with it too much until I decide it's a keeper. Void the warranty kind of thing.

Good catch on the charge weight inconsistency! I caught that .4 increment before I went to the range but figured it wasn't enough of a problem to fuss with at that point. When I first started out reloading, I followed the OCW method to a T, percentages and all, but after doing that for a while I settled on half grain increments at the low end (if I can only get a good load at minimum charge, I'm changing powders!) and .3 for the rest, as that seemed to be what it generally worked out to. I think that method goes down to 1% or something for the last few charge weights, or ~0.2gr at this level, but I'm not interested in running a load that close to max, so I don't feel the need to explore the razor's edge. I may switch to a single shot ladder style test like you do, to save components. 3-shot groups to find a velocity node is a waste. After doing this for 3 different cartridges now, I don't know that I believe in the OCW method. It hasn't once been as "textbook" as it is touted to be and probably confuses things even more, at least in my experience. I only used it initially because I didn't have a chronograph.

I agree with your assessment of 0.050 jump being a good starting point for most modern bullets. I see 0.040 being recommended quite a bit as well - similar enough. I actually landed at 100 jump based on my tests with H1000, but realize that may or may not translate at all for Superformance so I just stuck with it, knowing I would be doing a seating depth test next anyway, once I identify a node and decide to proceed with this powder (not that I have much choice).

I've never done a seating depth test as fine as you have - I generally go in 40 thou increments to start, then hone in on a depth in 10 thou increments, but I suppose it doesn't hurt to fine tune a little more.

I could post pics of my H1000 groups if you'd like (no chrony data) for comparison, but if you were in my shoes would you continue down the Superformance road? Change bullets?

No problem. I geek out on this stuff and am very impatiently waiting for 2 rifles to get back from smith's so I can get back to shooting, so right now I'm only vicariously involved and worse than normal lol.

Sounds like we agree on pretty much everything. I don't solely trust OCW because I see the physics of it as harmonically tuning by charge which can be great if the stars align, but I think once you adjust seating depth all that changes and I've seen the lowest ES/SD numbers come from what OCW guys call "scatter nodes" and then be tuned into .3" groups by seating. In my experience they affect each other, and usually never equally or predictably. So I try and incorporate methodology from any process makes sense, or isn't getting to a level of minimal or no return.

Running seating depth tests the only reason why I stick to smaller increments is because that's usually where I want to be. Erik Cortina claims that jump/accuracy nodes show up in way tighter increments in the sine wave format, and making too big of jumps can cause you to overlook tons of them. I usually test 50, 70, 90, and 110 to see if anything jumps out, and then go real small increments north and south of that if you're not quite where you want to be.

In your case if it were me I would test seating depth since you've already come this far. I would probably go with that 55.4 or 56.6gr charge and see what happens. 56.6 is a solid intersection of velocities. If you don't see anything come out of that test it might be time to dig in a little further before wasting components.

One last thought, I see you said you're using bushing dies. Are you running your sized brass over an expander ball or mandrel, or relying on the bushing to set your neck tension? Because I think that can cause tension inconsistencies. I prefer to size with no expander ball in, and then put it in and run the necks over it in a separate step so it doesn't pull the shoulder out after resizing.

 

[Shortmag11]

124gr bullet is really light for your fast (8 twist) Barrel. I would expect that bullet to perform better in a slower twist barrel something like a factory .260 Rem. I’d would expect much better results with a 140-143gr bullet in your rifle. I’m starting load development with a Browning X-bolt PRO myself. Mine is a 7 twist so I’m starting development with 156 EOL’s and RL26. Will eventually tinker with the 143 ELDX and 140AB. Have H-1000 and N565 on hand that I will do some experimenting with also. Good luck.

 

[wind gypsy]

124gr bullet is really light for your fast (8 twist) Barrel. I would expect that bullet to perform better in a slower twist barrel something like a factory .260 Rem. I’d would expect much better results with a 140-143gr bullet in your rifle. I’m starting load development with a Browning X-bolt PRO myself. Mine is a 7 twist so I’m starting development with 156 EOL’s and RL26. Will eventually tinker with the 143 ELDX and 140AB. Have H-1000 and N565 on hand that I will do some experimenting with also. Good luck.

Not experienced with hammers but 127 lrx is about the same length as most 140 class bullets and probably longer than a 140 AB. I wouldn’t think an 8 twist would be too much for a 124 mono.

 

[TurboSportTSi]

I would check another thing on your rifle. The internal mag box in a Christensen Arms rifle has to fit just right with the bottom metal or else the box gets wedged. Make sure it is free floating and not binding.

My first Ridgeline shot really well with only the spot bedding but I still go further and bed most of the action minus around the trigger area. I've setup several Ridgelines and an ELR rifle and have been able to get them to shoot better than advertised. I don't have any experience with your bullet of choice but that might also be something to consider. My 6.5 PRCs shoot heavy for caliber bullets really well. My 6.5 PRC Christensen Arms Ridgeline is one I'll keep for a long time. I have it's replacement barrel ready to go when the original goes.

That mag box is a true PITA...found that out the hard way when I disassembled it the first time. I think I'm good-to-go there now. Based on what I found, I think it would be hard to put it together all the way with that piece not seated correctly, but maybe not!

No problem. I geek out on this stuff and am very impatiently waiting for 2 rifles to get back from smith's so I can get back to shooting, so right now I'm only vicariously involved and worse than normal lol.

Sounds like we agree on pretty much everything. I don't solely trust OCW because I see the physics of it as harmonically tuning by charge which can be great if the stars align, but I think once you adjust seating depth all that changes and I've seen the lowest ES/SD numbers come from what OCW guys call "scatter nodes" and then be tuned into .3" groups by seating. In my experience they affect each other, and usually never equally or predictably. So I try and incorporate methodology from any process makes sense, or isn't getting to a level of minimal or no return.

Running seating depth tests the only reason why I stick to smaller increments is because that's usually where I want to be. Erik Cortina claims that jump/accuracy nodes show up in way tighter increments in the sine wave format, and making too big of jumps can cause you to overlook tons of them. I usually test 50, 70, 90, and 110 to see if anything jumps out, and then go real small increments north and south of that if you're not quite where you want to be.

In your case if it were me I would test seating depth since you've already come this far. I would probably go with that 55.4 or 56.6gr charge and see what happens. 56.6 is a solid intersection of velocities. If you don't see anything come out of that test it might be time to dig in a little further before wasting components.

One last thought, I see you said you're using bushing dies. Are you running your sized brass over an expander ball or mandrel, or relying on the bushing to set your neck tension? Because I think that can cause tension inconsistencies. I prefer to size with no expander ball in, and then put it in and run the necks over it in a separate step so it doesn't pull the shoulder out after resizing.

LOL @ your rifleless antics!

I'll run a seating depth test and report back. Won't be until next weekend at the earliest. Also, I gave the rifle another once-over the other day and got real annoyed by the stock-to-barrel fit and realized that the light sanding I had done a while back "just in case" made hardly any difference, visually. I wrapped some sandpaper around a couple deep-wall sockets and went to town. I wound up really hogging out the stock because this is a stupid problem to have with a >$2k rifle and I didn't want to have to think about it any more. That, and I noticed that during my H-1000 load dev, I had 2 groups with the same charge weight and seating depth (one from OCW and another from depth test) and they were polar opposites...one was 4 holes touching with a small flyer, and the other looked like buckshot. That kind of intermittent issue made me think twice about the possible stock contact.

I do run the expander in my sizing die. I think I decided to forego it on my last bushing die (7 LRM)... I don't see a purpose for that ball, since the brass should be larger than the bushing when it goes in, then sized to the bushing. Why would you want to mess with it after that? I will pull it from this one as well.

Honestly, I think this is way too big of an issue to be a slight variance in neck tension, but for perfection's sake, I do prefer to remove variables when possible! Anyone familiar with tolerance stacking would surely agree.

124gr bullet is really light for your fast (8 twist) Barrel. I would expect that bullet to perform better in a slower twist barrel something like a factory .260 Rem. I’d would expect much better results with a 140-143gr bullet in your rifle. I’m starting load development with a Browning X-bolt PRO myself. Mine is a 7 twist so I’m starting development with 156 EOL’s and RL26. Will eventually tinker with the 143 ELDX and 140AB. Have H-1000 and N565 on hand that I will do some experimenting with also. Good luck.

Good instincts, but Hammer says they designed it specifically for a 1 in 8 twist. The next step up in weight is a 131gr and they say that is for a 1 in 7.5.

Also, thanks!

Not experienced with hammers but 127 lrx is about the same length as most 140 class bullets and probably longer than a 140 AB. I wouldn’t think an 8 twist would be too much for a 124 mono.

Sounds right to me!

 

[TurboSportTSi]

I guess it depends on how much you trust the third string, but utilizing all three strings 56.6 appears to be a velocity node (lowest ES / SD), however if you do not trust 3rd string, I would probably choose 57.0. Simple seating depth changes can be 1" groups to .3" groups.

I recommend the crimp, because a lot of guys whose life revolve around hammer bullets do it. They put the end of the case in a valley and crimp it down. They say due to the shape of parabolic bands, it helps with consistency similar to neck tension...but that hammers require more than other bullets.

Check out the hammertime forum and they walk through it. I am just getting into it, no expert at crimping but it sounds like it has a good impact on these bullets.

Your post evaded the multi-quote somehow.

I trust the trend of the third string, not so much the actual numbers. Not saying they weren't completely accurate - they make very well have been - but since I broke my setup down and left after 2 strings, then came back later, the chrony could've been a foot or so different than it was previously, which is why I was looking at changes in the slope of the lines to find a node and not at the velocities themselves.

The crimp theory makes sense, since Hammers have such little bearing surface. I could see super heavy neck tension on such small bands potentially leading to some suboptimal results, hence the crimp. Hammers do seem different enough that it would warrant digging into that forum a bit more.

 

[TurboSportTSi]

Quick update, just for some kind of closure. After hogging out the barrel channel and turning necks, I ordered a new bushing die to match the new neck OD and increased neck tension from 2 to 3 thou.

I ran a seating depth test from 20 to 50 jump (started @ 20 per Steve from Hammer bullets) and all shot no worse than 1 to maybe 1.5 MOA....which sounds horrible but is a great improvement for this rifle. I shot a ~0.5 MOA group with 35 jump, then it opened right back up after that. A crappy rifle and/or load can't ever shoot a half inch, but a bad shooter can shoot big groups with a tack driver...with rifle season fast approaching, I'm going to call it and hope this powder isn't too temp sensitive. Will revisit once I have the luxury of more time & powder. If anyone has a pound or two of Superformance they would part with, I'd be interested...

From this debacle, I have learned and/or decided a few things:

1. Christensen sucks. 1 MOA guarantee is a joke that many sub-$1k factory rifles come with, crooked bedding, sharp edges in the action that scratch brass that their gunsmiths couldn't figure out, a monte carlo stock adding a full pound over the standard version, a rough bore that was "hand lapped" and took about 100 rds to clean up...never again! Should've put a Proof on my modded Savage instead. Worst purchase I've made in years and not at all satisfying.

2. This rifle is picky. No harm, no foul, as long as I can find something it likes. Wouldn't normally be such an issue, but thanks to covid, it is a PITA.

3. I believe that I need more practice shooting such a light rifle. I've probably gotten undisciplined with my form over the years and increasingly impatient - that much I admit. My usual rig is around 10.5-11.5 lbs and this one is easily 2 lbs lighter, though the muzzle break manages recoil better than my other rig that is suppressed, oddly enough.

4. As soon as I can get my hands on better brass, I will jump on it. Having to cull, weight sort, and neck turn just isn't worth it, though I didn't have much choice this time because of covid paired with the popularity of the PRC.


At the moment, I'm a somewhat relieved, but not quite happy camper. What I have should work fine for hunting out to reasonable ranges, but so would any random off the shelf rifle with a $200 scope and factory loaded ammo.

 

[Harvey_NW]

That's unfortunate. I highly suggest testing a few with .002" expanded neck tension.

Keep an eye out, I saw 100pcs of Lapua pop up on Midsouth the other day just browsing around.

 

[7wssm]

Here’s a prc I just finished loading

went through 4 different powder combos and found h4831sc to be the ticket although all the othe powders weren’t bad.

RL26 close to max charge I was getting 3350 fps
RL23 3250
H1000 3000 fps with a wide node 1 full grn

H4831sc close to max 3180 fps with very low sd/es and .25 groups

 

[TurboSportTSi]

That's unfortunate. I highly suggest testing a few with .002" expanded neck tension.

Keep an eye out, I saw 100pcs of Lapua pop up on Midsouth the other day just browsing around.

What do you mean by '.002" expanded neck tension?'

I was running .002" neck tension previously and switched to .003". Are you suggesting increasing that by 2 thou, decreasing by 2 thou, or going back to exactly 2 thou neck tension?

Good spot on the Lapua brass! I will start checking around. I know folks have been getting their backordered stuff fairly recently, so maybe there's a surplus from the latest production run floating around out there.

I think my Noslers are at an OK point now but I would be very interested to see the distribution of weights across 100 pieces of Lapua. That is the one thing that could really be tightened up even more. I've culled about 1/3 of my brass, which I expected, but I could take that a step further if I wanted to get really picky.

My weights were in 2 groups about around 2 average weights, which makes further culling difficult. I ran into the same problem with the early Hornady headstamped Gunwerks 7 LRM brass and wound up running 2 different weight classes for 2 different loads, which is a PITA.

Here’s a prc I just finished loading

went through 4 different powder combos and found h4831sc to be the ticket although all the othe powders weren’t bad.

RL26 close to max charge I was getting 3350 fps
RL23 3250
H1000 3000 fps with a wide node 1 full grn

H4831sc close to max 3180 fps with very low sd/es and .25 groups

You know, from what I've read, my impression is that there isn't much out there that H4831SC doesn't work at least reasonably well for! Pretty versatile powder. I've never tried it but will buy a pound or two to keep around if I ever see it.

What bullet did you develop that load for?

 

[Harvey_NW]

What do you mean by '.002" expanded neck tension?'

I mean using a mandrel or expander ball to expand up to your desired neck tension, at .002" under bullet diameter. I run all my brass over the expander ball twice for good measure.

Previously you asked why I would suggest that, the physical theory is that if your neck isn't absolutely perfect in wall thickness, when it gets sized down the tension won't be concentric. Some argue that during seating it pushes those forces back outward and essentially self corrects, but running it over an absolute value ensures it. Just something that makes sense to me and I've always done it.

Check out this research on jump, lots of good data there showing in most cases the most forgiving accuracy windows are .050"+ off the lands with the newer technology high bc style bullets. I've never personally shot hammer bullets, I'm just trying to toss out ideas that won't waste a bunch of components to test quickly before you scrap the whole project. That's pretty frustrating.

Bullet Jump Research: Executive Summary & Load Development Tips

This is the last post in a series of articles focused on bullet jump research that has been conduct...

precisionrifleblog.com

 

[7wssm]

What do you mean by '.002" expanded neck tension?'

I was running .002" neck tension previously and switched to .003". Are you suggesting increasing that by 2 thou, decreasing by 2 thou, or going back to exactly 2 thou neck tension?

Good spot on the Lapua brass! I will start checking around. I know folks have been getting their backordered stuff fairly recently, so maybe there's a surplus from the latest production run floating around out there.

I think my Noslers are at an OK point now but I would be very interested to see the distribution of weights across 100 pieces of Lapua. That is the one thing that could really be tightened up even more. I've culled about 1/3 of my brass, which I expected, but I could take that a step further if I wanted to get really picky.

My weights were in 2 groups about around 2 average weights, which makes further culling difficult. I ran into the same problem with the early Hornady headstamped Gunwerks 7 LRM brass and wound up running 2 different weight classes for 2 different loads, which is a PITA.




You know, from what I've read, my impression is that there isn't much out there that H4831SC doesn't work at least reasonably well for! Pretty versatile powder. I've never tried it but will buy a pound or two to keep around if I ever see it.

What bullet did you develop that load for?

Oh totally forgot to state that

Badlands bd2 125 grn

here’s the pic with the load data

 

[OXN939]

1. Christensen sucks.

Man, I really hate to bring this up...

Christensen Arms Mesa Journey

I've been updating a previous thread, but feel it's an appropriate time for this to get its own. Purchased a CA Mesa in .308 a few months ago for a mid-long range hunting rig. It's a great rifle in a lot of ways- fit and finish was nice, Triggertech trigger was great, stock was comfortable and...

www.rokslide.com

But also, if anyone has a few extra ADG or Lapua

 

[Jeffb717]

Awesome thread! What’s a pita?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk