I'm getting ready to hunt bears in Prince William Sound (first week of May, God willin' and the creek don't rise), and I've decided to take the Remington M700 Classic in 8x57 and use the ANVB (Ain't No Varmint Bullet). Hey, if I'm gonna make 'em, I oughtta use 'em.
I also took the relatively new (unfired) Savage .223 bolt gun with some "factory" 55-grain FMJ ammo, and some handloads.
I REALLY have to get the 8x57 1) sighted in, and 2) a reasonable load worked up for the ANVB.
I wanted to use W748 powder, as that gave good velocity and pressure values with a timing node, but when I went to "the cupboard" the cupboard was bare of W748. Of course no one has ANY powder these days because of all of the stupid panic buying. So, I had to use I3031. It actually gave better "paper" numbers than W748, but I have yet to have the ACTUAL performance of I3031 come even CLOSE to what QL says it will do. Nonetheless, I HAVE I3031. I DON'T have w748.
The timing node with a 24" barrel is achieved with something around 50.0 grains of I3031. That yields a paper-whipped MV of 3204 f/s at a max pressure of 49,000 PSI for the 125-grain ANVB. I loaded up 3 rounds of 50.9, 3 with 51.0 and 4 with 51.1 grains. "Normally" I would have used 0.3-grain increments, but I had some faith that this was going to be "close", because I had very precise measurements of the rifle and cases.
Keeping the story short, I decided to go the public range that I have come to seriously dislike. The reasons for going there were that it is approaching "breakup" here, and even those few places on public land that I might consider setting up, there is no chance of that at this time of year. Second, I was kinda in a hurry, and didn't want to fiddle around trying to find a "make do" place to shoot. Third, I needed this session to "work" for getting the rifle sighted in properly and finding a load for the ANVB. I didn't want to 'half-donkey' it and not get conclusive data. So, I ended up at the public range.
Of course it started off on the 'wrong foot', as it always does nowadays at this range. There was something 'going on' with the local cops, and they had most of the range occupied. The good news was, it was nearly 3 o'clock in the afternoon, and they were wrapping up. Secondly, the only range available to me was one in which the minimum range to set a target was 50 yd. If you could see the place you'd see how STUPID that is. Nonetheless, that was 'reality'.
I had not wanted to waste ANVBs in sighting in the scope, so I had loaded up 10 rounds with Hornady 125-grian HPs. I would use those for "getting on paper", then fine tune with ANVBs. Normally, I would start that process at 25 to 35 yd, depending on where the "paper-whipping" said the bullet path crossed the line of sight. Of course, I couldn't set the target short of 50 yd, so that's where I started.
Here is a picture of the target. (I used the same target for all the 8x57 shooting.) In this picture, you can see a tight group, one high hole, and two near the bulls-eye.
(http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o266/paulskvorc/Swaging/Rem8x57No280125gHornHP50gI30314-19-11_zpsfb7e7b56-1_zps2d2e728a.jpg) (http://s122.photobucket.com/user/paulskvorc/media/Swaging/Rem8x57No280125gHornHP50gI30314-19-11_zpsfb7e7b56-1_zps2d2e728a.jpg.html)
You'll see numbers 1 through 6 in the picture. 1,2, and 3 are the first shots after bore-sighting. Number 4 - up at the top left in the number "3" - is the fourth shot BECAUSE I MOVED THE BLASTED SCOPE IN THE WRONG DIRECTION. :angry: Number 5 is moving it back, and number 6, down in the red bull, is the last shot at 50 yd.
This group is the next three shots - 7,8, and 9 - at 100 yd, still with the Hornady 125s. Certainly not 'awe inspiring', and a little unexpected based on the 4-shot group at 50 yd seen in the previous picture.
(http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o266/paulskvorc/Swaging/Rem8x57No280125gHornHP50gI30314-19-11100yd_zps259ee98c-1_zps4b9758c0.jpg) (http://s122.photobucket.com/user/paulskvorc/media/Swaging/Rem8x57No280125gHornHP50gI30314-19-11100yd_zps259ee98c-1_zps4b9758c0.jpg.html)
The size of the 50-yd group was 1.607 minutes of an angle. The size of the 100-yd group was 2.943 minutes of an angle. That is ALMOST twice the MOA size. Sumpin' funny going on there. I think they might be "waking up" :MOGRIN: (as opposed to the "going to sleep" that some people propose bullets do).
Maybe I should make something clear lest someone unfamiliar with what "minute of an angle" really means.
Using the term "minute of an angle" (MOA) standardizes a group's size independent of range. So, the actual size of the group at 50 yd was 0.767 inches. That is 1.607 minutes of an angle. The size is "normalized" with respect to range. Comparing groups sizes in minutes of an angle allows one to disregard the range at which the group was shot. Therefore, if one shoots a 1.607 MOA group at 50 yd, one would expect the same firearm to shoot the same bullet from the same rifle using the same load into the same MOA-SIZED group regardless of the range.
To complete the explanation: NOT compensating for range in this specific example means that the 50-yd group size of 0.767 INCHES "should" have produced a group size IN INCHES, at 100 yd, of approximately 2 times 0.767", or 1.607". You'll note that this is the same number IN MOAs that I reported for the 50-yd group. That's because 1 MOA at 100 yd equals approximately 1 inch - actually 1.047 inches. Therefore, the 100-yd group size in MOA units, is 1.83 (almost twice) as big as the it "should" have been if "something" wasn't "amiss".
So I started shooting the ANVBs hoping 'things' might get better. They didn't.
By the way... the ANVB cartridges were loaded to place the bullet's caliber-diameter-ogive 0.050" off of the lands. Unfortunately, that meant a seating depth of only 0.191". That is only 59% of a caliber. I prefer not to have less than 67% of a caliber of the bullet in the neck of the case. Therefore, I crimped - using Lee's "Factory Crimp" - all of the ANVB cartridges. The Hornady 125 HPs were seated 0.300" deep, which meant that they were approximately 0.110 inches off of the lands. I'll come back to that in my conclusions.
Here is the first group of three of the ANVBs. The charge is 50.9 grains of I3031.
(http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o266/paulskvorc/Swaging/Rem8x57No280125gANVB50-9gI30314-19-11_zps1badbe88-1_zps67533e3a.jpg) (http://s122.photobucket.com/user/paulskvorc/media/Swaging/Rem8x57No280125gANVB50-9gI30314-19-11_zps1badbe88-1_zps67533e3a.jpg.html)
As you can see, it ain't 'pretty'. Group size is 3.102 MOA.
Here is the next 3-shot group. Charge is 51.0 grains of I3031. Group size is 2.133 MOA.
(http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o266/paulskvorc/Swaging/Rem8x57No280125gANVB51gI30314-19-11_zps6f93f3f7-1_zps4bcb2476-1_zps419adf24.jpg) (http://s122.photobucket.com/user/paulskvorc/media/Swaging/Rem8x57No280125gANVB51gI30314-19-11_zps6f93f3f7-1_zps4bcb2476-1_zps419adf24.jpg.html)
Here's the last 3-shot group of ANVBs. Charge is 51.1 grains of I3031. Group size is 3.656 MOAs.
(http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o266/paulskvorc/Swaging/Rem8x57No280125gANVB51_1gI30314-19-11_zps9f7a6366-1_zpsd02b8fe4.jpg) (http://s122.photobucket.com/user/paulskvorc/media/Swaging/Rem8x57No280125gANVB51_1gI30314-19-11_zps9f7a6366-1_zpsd02b8fe4.jpg.html)
By the way, the line drawn around the bullet holes includes one of the Hornady 125s, and excludes one of the ANVBs. The hole in the RED bull is the Hornady, the hole slightly lower and left is the ANVB.
So...
As you can imagine, I'm not too happy with this. There are some interesting "things" to note:
1) The ANVB and the Hornady shot similarly-sized groups even though;
-a) They had radically different seating depths, 0.050 and 0.110 off the lands.
-b) They had different charges, 50.0 for the Hornady and 50.9 to 51.1 for the ANVB.
2) The groups I shot several weeks ago at 50 yd at my house using the ANVB from the 8mm SLT were comparable to the 50 yd group of the Hornady yesterday.
3) The Hornady 100yd groups were TWICE as big as they "should" have been based on the 50-yd groups.
Obviously, the "jump" caused by being far off of the lands, isn't having much of an effect on group size. The 8mm Steyr LONG THROAT meant a big "jump", and the 50-yd groups were essentially the same size as these 50-yd groups. Even the difference of about 60 thousandths in the ones shot from the Remington using different bullets produced very similar group sizes at 100 yd.
Here's what I think I am going to do:
1) I'm going to load the ANVBs to 2/3rd of a caliber (0.216") seating depth. This MAY make a difference.
2) I'm going to continue to crimp. I THINK this will make ignition more uniform.
3) I'm going to weigh the jackets before selecting a core weight, and thereby do my best to make the between-bullet-weights as uniform as I can. I DON'T THINK this matters, but I don't like the current variability in weights.
4) Use a different powder than I3031. I've never been able to get that powder to produce small groups. I wouldn't change this if I didn't THINK it WOULD matter.
5) I MAY shoot at 50, 75, 100, and 150 to see if I can figure out what's happening between 50 and 100 yd, AND to see if it is getting worse as the range increases.
6) I will continue to load Hornady 125s just to have a "standard" bullet to compare so that I don't incorrectly think a problem is unique to the ANVB.
I took my chronograph to the range, but I so hate having to "deal with" all the hoohah at the range, I decided not to fiddle with it. I can get chrono data "out behind my garage".
Paul
By the way... The fact that the factory Hornady bullets "opened up" at 100 yd, AND that the 50-yd group with the ANVB out of the 8mm SST is essentially the same size, gives me confidence that the "issue" isn't my hand-made procedures or bullets. Gotta be something else.
Paul
Into the best laid plans!
All things considered - new HAND-MADE jacketed bullets, new rifle, new load - I'm not dis-heartened. I am disappointed in the results, but I THINK/HOPE I can get it shooting smaller groups.
One of the primary reasons I chose the 8x57 is because I don't have the 8mm SST (Steyr SHORT Throat) completed yet, and the throat on the 8mm SLT (Steyr LONG Throat) is LONG and much longer than on the Remington 8x57.
However, 3" groups are not because of "jumping" the throat. There's something else amiss. I'm hoping that "tightening" everything else up INCLUDING changing the powder, will shrink the group sizes substantially. If it does, I can then tweak the seating depth to fine tune the load.
Paul
A possible loose scope?
Hope that a powder change will give a better result!
No loose scope. Had enough of those in recent years to check that early on.
I too hope powder change will make a significant difference.
I spent a few hours making 23 more bullets as close to exactly 125 grains as I could. Considering the printed tip, that's a pain in the rear. The best I can do is a bit better than plus or minus half a grain.
The variability in the jacket weight is a bigger problem than I anticipated. It's easy to get the cores to essentially identical weights. But "shaving" off the jacket to reach a specific weight turns out to be impractical. If I wasn't using the printed tips, I could seat the core, then drill the core until the exact weight was achieved, then form the tip. Having to seat the tip complicates the process such that, as I said, within half a grain is the best I can do.
All of that said, I am quite certain that half a grain variation in weight is completely insignificant. What I believe is definitely significant is the exact same dimensions on the bullets. That effects seating depth, which in turn effects pressure and timing. These freshly made bullets will all have exactly the same "form factor".
As soon as I get the rest of the bullets completed, I'll load some more. I have to select a new powder.
Paul
My "gut" is telling me that's too much powder. Try 48.5-49 grains of I3031. 50 grains should be getting close to being compressed?
Do you have any Benchmark or H335 or I4064 or even (gag me with a fork) Varget
I've never had any luck with I4064 or W748.
RJ
Guessed that you would have checked but thought it worth a mention!
Had a little problem with a Meopta scope recently which was not allowing any better grouping from a rimfire, turned out it was a problem with the elevation and windage adjusters on the internal tube. Apparently the adjusters had at some point been screwed to the limit and caused some burring...
Looks like you will just have to sit down and grade those jackets!
RJ - You are correct, it is a compressed charge. However, I don't comprehend "too much powder". I regularly load cases with "too much powder" and get excellent results.
I do have Benchmark, I4064, and Varget. (Why don't you like Varget? I neither "like" it or dislike it. Just curious why you don't.) While I know many others have, I've never had any luck getting small groups from I4064. I am tempted to use Accurate 4064 though. I haven't used W-748 before, and I don't have any H335. I'd like to get some of that. Another powder I would like to get is A-2520. It looks good 'on paper' (QuickLoad).
Here is a list of powders I have in hand:
Accurate 2495
Accurate 4064
Accurate 5744
Alliant BlueDot
Alliant Bullseye
Alliant Herco
Alliant Power Pistol
Alliant Reloder-10x
Alliant Reloder-15
Alliant Reloder-17
Alliant Reloder-19
Alliant Reloder-22
Alliant Unique
Hodgdon 110
Hodgdon 414
Hodgdon 4227
Hodgdon 4350
Hodgdon 4831
Hodgdon Benchmark
Hodgdon BL-C2
Hodgdon Li'lGun
Hodgdon Pyrodex RS
Hodgdon Varget
IMR 3031
IMR 4064
IMR 4227
IMR 4320
IMR 4350
IMR 4759
IMR 7828
IMR PB
IMR TrailBoss
Ramshot Hunter
Vihtavouri-133
Vihtavouri-135
Vihtavouri-150
Winchester 296
Winchester 760
Here is a list of powders I am considering, based on QL's output. Merging the two lists, those in yellow are on both.
Accurate 2495
Accurate 2520
Accurate 4064
Accurate 4350
Alliant Reloder-10x
Alliant Reloder-15
Alliant Reloder-17
Hodgdon BL-C2
Hodgdon H322
Hodgdon H380
Hodgdon H414
Hodgdon H4895
IMR 3031
IMR 4320
IMR 4831
IMR 4895
Ramshot BigGame
Ramshot Hunter
Ramshot TAC
Vihtavuori N135
Winchester 748
Winchester 760
A reader might ask, "What criteria puts a powder on the list for consideration?"
"That powder can provide a charge that is near the top of the list in muzzle velocity while still being below the max chamber pressure and have a load density (% of case capacity) that is between 85% and 105%."
For the above powders in consideration whether I have them in hand or not, the following charts are the output of QL when I analyze the cartridge using the barrel length and chamber dimensions of the specific Rem 700, the ANVB, and the specific seating depth. The first table is the data sorted by "Load Density" (the percentage of the capacity of the case filled by the powder charge - WITH THE BULLET SEATED). I have fixed the MV at 3200 f/s (I'll explain that later), and allowed the other variables to 'float' where they may. The highlighted ones are the ones I have on hand.
(http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o266/paulskvorc/Swaging/8x57PwdrSelectionbyLoadDensityMVfixed3200_zps52914804.jpg) (http://s122.photobucket.com/user/paulskvorc/media/Swaging/8x57PwdrSelectionbyLoadDensityMVfixed3200_zps52914804.jpg.html)
The load densities in the first column after the powder name.
In this next table I have allowed all variables to 'float' within the following constraints: Max pressure can't exceed 52,500 PSI, (the action could HANDLE much more, but I don't care to beat my rifle up), and the load density must fall between 65 and 105%. The table is sorted by MV from highest to lowest.
(http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o266/paulskvorc/Swaging/8x57PwdrSelectionbyMV_zpse222304f.jpg) (http://s122.photobucket.com/user/paulskvorc/media/Swaging/8x57PwdrSelectionbyMV_zpse222304f.jpg.html)
Again, and from here on out, the yellow ones are the ones I have on hand. Note the MVs. Those near 3200 f/s are why I chose that figure in the last analysis. It's probably as high as I can expect from this rifle/cartridge system. I don't intend to consider any powder that doesn't yield a MV of at least 3000 f/s.
The following tables are the same data as above, but sorted for a different variable in order to illustrate the significance of that variable. The next one is sorted by Load Density:
(http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o266/paulskvorc/Swaging/8x57PwdrSelectionbyLoadDensity_zps949f837e.jpg) (http://s122.photobucket.com/user/paulskvorc/media/Swaging/8x57PwdrSelectionbyLoadDensity_zps949f837e.jpg.html)
The following data is sorted on the percentage of powder burnt in the barrel before the bullet exits. I prefer that figure be 100%. That said, one of the most precise rifles I own has a "burnt in barrel" percentage of only about 90%.
(http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o266/paulskvorc/Swaging/8x57PwdrSelectionbyBurntInBBL_zpscdd5ec1a.jpg) (http://s122.photobucket.com/user/paulskvorc/media/Swaging/8x57PwdrSelectionbyBurntInBBL_zpscdd5ec1a.jpg.html)
This last table is the data sorted on "Timing"- the time it takes the bullet to exit the muzzle. This figure is compared to values calculated from the equations of Optimal Barrel Timing Theory. For a 24" barrel, a timing node occurs at 1.022 ms. Experience has shown me that, based on group size, the REAL timing node occurs at somewhere between 0 and 3% "down" in "typical", "hunting" bolt-action rifles with wooden stocks. Highlighted in the following table are timing figures that are in the range I would consider.
(http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o266/paulskvorc/Swaging/8x57PwdrSelectionbyTiming_zpsf1cd8b10.jpg) (http://s122.photobucket.com/user/paulskvorc/media/Swaging/8x57PwdrSelectionbyTiming_zpsf1cd8b10.jpg.html)
After all of this analysis (which took WAY more time to present than to do), it looks to me like Alliant 10x is the next powder I will try. It has a "good" load density of 97%; the MV is acceptable at 3150 f/s; it burns 100% of the powder in the barrel; the pressure is higher than I would like at teh 52,500 PSI ceiling, but it is acceptable; and the timing is right on the theoretical timing node, meaning that I can move up or down with ease to fine-tune the charge and seating depth IF it turns out that this powder gets me "close" to 1.5 MOAs.
j0e_bl0ggs - I don't think the scope is the problem. I think variability in the ANVB is ONE problem. Of course if that were the ONLY problem, the 125 Hornadys would have shot better at 100 too. I have spent a lot of time making 20+ more bullets. There was a lot of trouble associated with getting "things" right if using the printed tips.
You may recall that when I did the terminal performance tests using the 8mm SLT, it was clear that the tips were coming loose from the bullet while it was still in the barrel. I am convinced that is caused by the "jump" across a "long" throat. Again, if this was the ONLY problem, the Hornady bullets wouldn't have performed badly at 100 because they don't have tips to come off.
Nonetheless, I am eliminating the tips for this preliminary load workup in which I am trying to find a powder that I like. Once I have a powder selected, I will go back to fine tuning the swaging process to see if I can get the printed tips to "behave".
For the time being, I am focused on getting the finished weights of the bullets as uniform as I can. Without the tips, I am getting them within plus or minus 0.1 grains. I HOPE that, and seating them to at least 2/3rd of a caliber (0.216"), will get the groups to tighten up. As I said, I intend to continue crimping.
Paul
Several look good,7 10x, 4895, benchmark stand out.
In several things, blc2 looks good, but the timing is off a bit.
Interesting.
Let's see how it works out.
I cannot begin to tell you how much I hate chronographs. I have wasted more bullets trying to get chronographs to work than I think I have shot at animals. At the moment, it's all I can do to be civil. I am VERY close to buying one of those new "proximity" type chronos for $275 and driving my truck repeatedly over the CED one that I have. $%^&*# I AM #$%^&*#& off!
So... I was readying for another bout with the #@$%^&* chronograph and I decided to check the 'scope rigidity again. #$%&! It took a pretty good torque to move it, but when I checked the tightening bolts, they were definitely loose enough to move with recoil. I suppose that's good news really. At least I have a VERY likely cause for the "mystery" of 1.6 MOA at 50 and 3 MOA at 100.
I did learn something else. I can't leave the tips off and have the meplat be the same diameter as it would be if they were on. They won't feed. The edge of the meplat catches the leading edge of the feed ramp. It isn't even a close call where I could use a finger to 'coax' it along. The meplat will have to close up or I will have to install a point.
About the only thing I did do was see that the 10x was a "pleasant" shoot. Tomorrow I will try again to get some chrono data. If I am frustrated tomorrow, I'm going to buy one of these: http://www.magnetospeed.com/collections/frontpage/products/magnetospeed-v1-ballistic-chronograph-1
Y'know what? I am so ticked off, I just bought one right now. I went to the site so I could copy the URL, and just decided that I have wasted too much of my life and blood pressure to put up with the **** that ALL of the other chronographs need. $291.25 delivered to my P.O. Box.
I'll report on it as soon as I get it. If they mail it tomorrow, I could have it by Friday.
Paul
Oh, me!
I had a thought this might happen when I mentioned this chrono.
Such machine language, tisk, tisk.
That' s the same price as on amazon.com
Yeah, I checked the manufacturer first to see if they were more than Amazon. When they weren't, I decided it would be best to buy directly from them.
When Sue asks, I am blaming this ALL OVER YOU!
Paul
Go right on, I am used to being abused!
Besides, it is 2500 miles for her to reach!!!!
;)
Ayup...
Actually, 2500 miles just gets a little beyond Seattle. And that's 'as the crow flies'. It's more like 4130 miles. At least according to Google Earth.
Paul
Await your results with baited breath...
If you need a new chrony you need one. Assuming this one works as advertised, it is not "that much" more than the others already out there. Plus the whole shooting in the dark issue you have up there, you should be pleased.
Sounds like $291.25 worth of shooting "valium" to me!
Quote from: Jamie.270;125599Sounds like $291.25 worth of shooting "valium" to me!
Laughed out loud at that one! :D
Your logic was kinda what I was thinking, Glenn. Now I just hafta figure out something
productive to do with the other two of them I have. I am trying to avoid the temptation to avail myself of the "valium effect" of taking a 3-pound hammer to them.
Paul
Perhaps send one to your worst enemy who lives even further north than you and let it drive him to distraction.?
craigs list? evilbay?
Quote from: drinksgin;125603Perhaps send one to your worst enemy who lives even further north than you and let it drive him to distraction.?
Not a bad idea, but I like all of the people that live north of me.
Probably Craig's List or EvilBay as Glenn suggested. I'll save the CED for arrows.
Paul
Well seeing that we are getting chono'd up a little taster in regard of the Aguilla SSS that I had a conversation with 'he who shall not be named' (little HP Lovecraft there)
50 rounds through my Anschutz only at 25M but absolutely on the button as far as groups were going.
Hanging my head in shame as I'm far from savvy with Excel...
Done in my usual 'fill the boots n go for it fashion' - set the chrono for a manual trigger and tune the height of the sensor deck - you'll love this Paul, 4 rounds! That is playing with 'advanced settings' heheheh I like it!
CED up for sale - ohhh yesss!
Just need to work on a visually more appealing spreadsheet layout!
(http://i915.photobucket.com/albums/ac356/j0e_bl0ggs/Web%20Stuff/AguillaSSS.jpg) (http://s915.photobucket.com/user/j0e_bl0ggs/media/Web%20Stuff/AguillaSSS.jpg.html)
As far as the data, was a little surprised to see that 805fps, in fact did notice that drop out of the group. ES was larger than I had anticipated. The mean at 868fps being well below the box 950fps was an eye opener too - in fact nothing came close!
CCI Quiets, 20 shot string;
(http://i915.photobucket.com/albums/ac356/j0e_bl0ggs/Web%20Stuff/CCIQuiet.jpg) (http://s915.photobucket.com/user/j0e_bl0ggs/media/Web%20Stuff/CCIQuiet.jpg.html)
710fps is CCI's box value.
I've found that I3031 doesn't really like to be compressed.
I concur that Benchmark or RL 10X would be the way to go. I use a compressed load of Benchmark in my .222.
Also, I seat my .243, .223's and .222 to 1/3 caliber with LFC bullets. What do you neck size with or are you FLRing? I never intentionally crimp rifle rounds (roll or taper) except for those that go in a tubular magazine. Not even the 300RUM or the 35 Whelen get a crimp. IMO, Bullet pull is more effective for getting the charge to ignite uniformly. As little as .0005 of an inch removed from the expander ball or mandrel (Lee collet die) makes crimping of any kind unnecessary. Using more "bullet pull" rather than relying on a crimp also means your brass doesn't need to be as "perfect" in length.
RJ
JB - OUTSTANDING! VERY COOL STUFF!
Interesting about the ACTUAL MV on the SSS. I'll have to look at my old chrono data for the SSS to see what I got out of 5 or so different rifles. If I remember correctly, I THINK the .22 RF can actually slow down if the barrel from which it is being shot is longer than what the cartridge was "designed" for. If you are shooting it out of a 26" barrel, maybe that accounts for the 'anemic' MVs. Just guessing.
RJ - Also interesting stuff! Maybe the I3031 in compression is the issue with that powder. Your points about the crimping are well-taken. All I would add is: In the same context that you mention not having to have the length "perfect", crimping means you don't have to have the neck ID "perfect".
1/3rd of a caliber would spook me in anything but a single shot.
Paul
Sorry there Paul, I meant 2/3 caliber :oops: The 2 and 1 are so close together. And that is only for LFC bullets as in the varmint variety. My .222 is actually about 1/2 bullet diameter as that's all of the neck that gets sized using a .223 Lee collet die. Seems to work very well and I haven't had one fall apart yet.
I should also add the ALL my wheel gun bullets get a roll crimp.
RJ
As I said earlier, I have ordered the Magnetospeed chrono too. It could be here as soon as tomorrow, but I expect that it will be Friday instead. Until then, I have weighed all of the ANVB bullets I have in hand at the moment, and sorted them into 5-grain increments from 105 to 130. They're all within one grain of the target weight. That, and some paper-whipping done, I think I will wait to do anything more until I get the new chrono and have some measured instead of estimated MVs. Armed with those MVs, I will decide on what weight I am going to concentrate.
To that end, the printed tips are proving to be a little problematic in the forming process. That being the case, I may actually break down and buy some more of the "Black" tips at 50 cents a piece. I hate having to do that, but I have clearly seen that the meplat cannot be too large without incurring some feeding problems. Either I "point" them with lead which will makes them "heavy", or I get the expensive tips. For this summer's bear hunting, I can afford to buy some expensive tips if that's what it takes to get consistent weights that feed correctly.
The design of the "printed" tips can ultimately be adjusted to eliminate the forming problems, and in fact facilitate point forming.
Paul
Four candidates for 8mm SST (short-throated Steyr) and the AR-10
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=330910331719#ht_500wt_1414
Paul
By the way....
I am now the second THL owner of a Magnetospeed chronograph. :D
Paul
So... With the best data I could input to QuickLoad, it predicts a muzzle velocity of 3139 f/s with a 125-grain ANVB ahead of 45.4 grains of 10x from the Remington 8x57.
The first, and only so far, shot across the Magnetospeed read 3113 f/s. I'm likin' it!
Setup couldn't be easier. Because of the price, I doubt that this spells the end of CED and Chrony, etc., but "the end is near" for "light-based" chronographs, I assure you. And while I'm sure Oehler isn't in a panic, they should be worried about their costly "low end" chrono sales. This thing is too convenient.
I don't care for the 'ergonomics' of the display unit. Honestly, I am repeatedly disappointed in the "made in a garage" quality of A LOT of firearms related electronics. The pressure sensing equipment I bought several years ago had the "assembled in a garage" construction. It worked, but it should have been better made. Ditto for this thing's display unit. It looks like it was made in a high school electronics lab as somebody's project. It works, but with the $275 price, there's really no excuse for the amateurish "look and feel" of the display unit.
Used to be I dreaded the thought of going to the range with the chronograph. NOW, I will NOT go to the range without it! EVER!
Money well-spent.
THANK YOU, DON!
For sale - CED chronograph...
Paul
PS - j0e_bl0ggs asked me to write a "front end" for Excel that would automatically process the data that the Magnetospeed produces. Done and dusted...
Paul
And the first is?
QuoteWith the best data I could input to QuickLoad, it predicts a muzzle velocity of 3139 f/s with a 125-grain ANVB ahead of 45.4 grains of 10x from the Remington 8x57.
Is that what you were asking?
Paul
Quote from: gitano;125686By the way....
I am now the second THL owner of a Magnetospeed chronograph. :D
Paul
Actually, this is.
j0e_bl0ggs...
I bought mine first. He got his first. He doesn't live "at the end of the road".
Paul
Man, the po must have a lot of fast swimmers, much faster than their dog sleds, last time I looked he was in a furren country!
The battle of the chronos begins!
Magnetospeed has a UK distributor. I was happy with the speed in which I received mine. Ordered on Monday; shipped on Tuesday; received on Friday. When you live at the end of the road, that's pretty good service.
There will certainly be more chrono data coming from The Great White North, I can assure you. There's almost no reason to shoot a firearm at paper and not have this thing attached. I'm going to make a little bracket of some sort so I can attach the display/recorder to the rifle. In fact, it just occurred to me that it might be possible to attach it to the sling swivel stud somehow. I could even make a bracket so that I could see the display at the shot. All of this of course when one is shooting off-hand. At the bench, the "kickstand" for the display is fine.
Paul
Sounds as though you are about to overload on fun things!
;)
It's not a 50-shot sequence, but it is the first three shots over the Magnetospeed chronograph using the 8x57 and 125-grain ANVBs.
(http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o266/paulskvorc/Swaging/8x57No280125Anvb45_4G10X4-27-11_zps6a7a919c.jpg) (http://s122.photobucket.com/user/paulskvorc/media/Swaging/8x57No280125Anvb45_4G10X4-27-11_zps6a7a919c.jpg.html)
As I mentioned above, the QL-estimated MV was 3139 f/s. The average of 3137 for these three shots is pretty close. :) The standard deviation (22) is a bit large, but I expect that to go down with increased sample size.
Now I need to get it to shoot straight.
I'm hoping that tightening the bolts on the rings will bring the 3MOA groups to at least 1.5 MOA. The wind is howling at a sustained 30-35 with gusts to 50, so shooting paper at 100 yd and more would be a waste of time and resources to say nothing of frustrating. If I didn't have the Magnetospeed, I'd shoot some of the "Black-tipped" bullets just for speed, but since the Magnetospeed makes getting MV data so easy, there is no need to waste what few of those bullets I have on "just MV" when I can get 100-yd precision data too.
Paul
QuoteI don't care for the 'ergonomics' of the display unit. Honestly, I am repeatedly disappointed in the "made in a garage" quality of A LOT of firearms related electronics.
Have to agree with this.
Poorly thought out control box. The 3 position rocker switch needs to be jettisoned. The 'kickstand' is cheap junk however you dress it up - it really looks like a piece of left over Meccano.
Any time either of you want to get rid of one, I stand ready to pay the shipping!
;)
Nahhh, function is fine but ergo is poop!
Got a CED up for sale....
Here are the next four out of the 8x57 using 10x and the 125 ANVB. I seated these about 0.150" off the lands.
The first shot out of the barrel was the 3207 f/s one. You can see the stats for the group with that shot included. Here are the stats for the subsequent 3-shot group without that first shot.
Series . . .1 . . . Shots: . . . 3
Min . . . 3156 . . . Max . . . 3162
Avg . . . 3159 . . . S-D . . . . 3.1
ES . . . . . . . 6
An extreme spread of 6 f/s and a standard deviation of 3.1 with a sample size of only three. I've got a feeling that this is going to be closer to reality with my new bullet swaging technique. These bullets are from the first batch of bullets I swaged, and there is more variability in shape. That MIGHT account for the 3207 'flier'.
No hope of getting to target range for the next three days. It's raining all day today, and is predicted to for the next 72 hours.
No more shooting just for velocity. I think I'm going to stick with this powder, charge and seating depth. Now that I've settled on a load AND have tightened the scope up very tight, I've got to see if these are shooting straight. I'll get velocities off of the precision (group size) tests.
Paul
Since the weather has been snotty - 4" of snow yesterday, still here today - I've been working on my "technique" for making UNIFORM ANVBs. I think I have it down now. I made 40 of them that are all 125 grains plus or minus less than 0.1 grains. It was a bit tedious, but hey, these are handmade bullets after all.
8mm (.323) 125-grain ANVB on the left;
.308 Speer 130-grain HP in the middle;
7mm Speer (.284) 115-grain HP
(http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o266/paulskvorc/Swaging/94fc0ff8-fd57-4bc6-9fb0-682ae5a74b4c_zpsd796cb1c.jpg) (http://s122.photobucket.com/user/paulskvorc/media/Swaging/94fc0ff8-fd57-4bc6-9fb0-682ae5a74b4c_zpsd796cb1c.jpg.html)
That big meplat, (technically, the sharp point is the meplat, but I'm calling the metal opening the meplat), is impressive when shot into dirt at 3100-ish f/s. When I was doing the chronograph stuff for the posts above, the "explosion" of dirt at 50 yards was surprising. I can't wait to see what it does on an animal. REALLY...
In doing all the paper-whipping associated with getting a load worked up, I have discovered something: There is a "sweet spot" for weight for a given barrel and timing. In other words, if I have a 24" barrel, (like I do with the Rem 700 Classic), and I want to use a "light" bullet, AND I want to get close to a timing node, the bullet has a fairly narrow - say 10 grains max - weight window.
I was playing with QuickLOAD trying to get a good charge, near a timing node, for the 130-grain and 115-grain ANVBs that I had already made. What I discovered, was that given the 24" barrel, the pressure ceiling of about 52,500 PSI, and a timing node at 1.022 ms, I couldn't hit that node with the 130 or the 115 unless I was "hot" on the 130, or "cool" on the 115. That includes fiddling with the timing by adjusting the seating depth.
In retrospect, that shouldn't have been a surprise, but I didn't start to think about it until I saw that the 130 and 115 were just enough "off" of a sweet spot to give trajectory performances (elevation and retained energy), that were less than that of the 125. Actually, of course, the weight sweet spot is just a little closer to 115, but I haven't bothered to find the exact value. 125 is close enough. Maybe I'll do it for the next batch of bullets. Maybe not.
The weather is supposed to clear up later today, so maybe I will be able to get to do some precision work tomorrow.
Paul
PS - The weight sweet spot for the 28"-barreled 8mm Steyr SHORT Throat, is about 105 grains. QL predicts that a charge of 63.4 grains of I3031 (:() will produce 3777 f/s at the muzzle. At 200 yds, the impact velocity is 3000 f/s and the impact energy is 2100 ft-lbs. Now before 'you' tell me that this 'thing' will "explode", let me remind you of the more than DOUBLE thickness of the jacket. Maybe it will "explode", but I'm looking forward to seeing that explosion. :) By the way, the muzzle ENERGY is 3326 ft-lbs. Just under what my .338 Win Mag produces at the muzzle with a 210-grain bullet.
They are looking good!
A VERY disappointing day at the range with the next batch - most uniform weight and form - of 125-grain ANVBs. Shot 40 rounds. The only good news was that the new chronograph caught every shot, and I didn't even have to think about it. Small consolation when you see the groups/PATTERNS!
I loaded up the following 'versions':
1) Hornady 125 HP - 7 - For Sighting in and "ground truth".
2) ANVB 113 Black Tip - 4 - To see how they performed relative to the 125s with Printed Tips
3) ANVB 125 Printed Tip - 11* - These are "on" the timing node. These are the ones I'm 'after'
4) ANVB 125 Printed Tip - 6 - 1% down (0.3 grains) from on-node charge
5) ANVB 125 Printed Tip - 6 - 2% down...
6) ANVB 125 Printed Tip - 6 - 3% down...
*) I was getting frustrated and took the tips off of two of these to see if it made any difference. It didn't.
Here are pictures of the targets. You might want to hide the eyes of women and children...
(http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o266/paulskvorc/Swaging/IMG_6560_Copy_zps6e092cde.jpg) (http://s122.photobucket.com/user/paulskvorc/media/Swaging/IMG_6560_Copy_zps6e092cde.jpg.html)
(http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o266/paulskvorc/Swaging/IMG_6561_Copy_zps5b57aaaf.jpg) (http://s122.photobucket.com/user/paulskvorc/media/Swaging/IMG_6561_Copy_zps5b57aaaf.jpg.html)
In the top picture, if the hole doesn't have a line drawn around it in a "group", it was shot at 50 yd as part of "getting on paper". All of the rest were shot at 100 yards. Here are "the numbers" for the groups.
(http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o266/paulskvorc/Swaging/Target14-9-2013_zpsc75e6b55.jpg) (http://s122.photobucket.com/user/paulskvorc/media/Swaging/Target14-9-2013_zpsc75e6b55.jpg.html)
(http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o266/paulskvorc/Swaging/Target24-9-2013_zpsbfc8b073.jpg) (http://s122.photobucket.com/user/paulskvorc/media/Swaging/Target24-9-2013_zpsbfc8b073.jpg.html)
With the exception of the Hornady bullets, the smallest group was the first 3-shot group with the on-node charge. It can be seen in the upper target, on the left. It's size was 2.372 MoA. However, that number is mis-leading with respect to the "load", as the second four of the on-node charge can be seen below and to the right of those first three, and that group's size is 4.621 MoA.
The first 3-shot group of the -1% charge can be seen in the upper right of the top target. 3.430 MoA. The second 3-shot group of the -1% charge is on the right hand side with a size of 3.662 MoA. Notice how the first 3-shot group is "strung" left to right, while the second is strung "north to south". :Banghead:
The first 3-shot group of the -2% charge is found in the upper right of the lower target. All 6 of the -2% shots were taken with the same point of aim (POA), therefore, they can be treated as one 6-shot group even though they were shot at different times. Together, the 6-shot size is 5.519 MoA. :Banghead:
The group for the first -3% charge is found in the upper left of the lower target. It is strung out "north and south" and has a size of 5.026 MoA. The second 3-shot group is found beneath the center bullseye. It is strung out left to right, :Banghead: and has a size of 2.574 MoA. I "lost" the first shot of the second 3-shot group until I got home and was looking closely at the targets. It is almost exactly over the #3 shot of the Hornady group found below and left of the second -3% group.
Finally is the Hornady -3-shot group. Those bullets' charge was the on-node charge of 45.3 grains of Alliant 10x. As you can see it's size is 1.593 MoA. When would you think seeing a 100-yd 3-shot group of 1.7" be the "good" news? :Banghead:
I was getting frustrated after the 7th shot of the on-node batch, and decided to take the tips off of the last two and see if they shot any straighter. The first one didn't even hit the paper, and I the second one was so far off the PoA that I didn't note it. :Banghead:
SOMETHING'S going on, but for the life of me, I can't tell what it is. I am about 100% certain that it is not the configuration of the bullets. In other words; the consistency of the weight and shape of these bullets was as good as any factory bullet. It's really not reasonable to consider "hand-made" to be the cause for this abysmal precision. While the Hornady bullet's performance might lead one to question that conclusion, that Hornady group is nothing to write home about. I sincerely think there is something else going on. I suspect that the tips are the problem, but I can't figure out how. (I don't know where the black-tipped bullets went, but I recall that they weren't "good".)
I am going to make some "lead-tipped" versions and see if they shoot any better.
Here is the chrono data:
Here are the ANVB On Node shots:
(http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o266/paulskvorc/Swaging/ANVBOnNode_zps4b106c35.jpg) (http://s122.photobucket.com/user/paulskvorc/media/Swaging/ANVBOnNode_zps4b106c35.jpg.html)
ANVB On Node - No Tip:
(http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o266/paulskvorc/Swaging/ANVBOnNodeNoTip_zpsce4f8531.jpg) (http://s122.photobucket.com/user/paulskvorc/media/Swaging/ANVBOnNodeNoTip_zpsce4f8531.jpg.html)
ANVB -1%:
(http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o266/paulskvorc/Swaging/ANVBMinus1PerCent_zpse155de2c.jpg) (http://s122.photobucket.com/user/paulskvorc/media/Swaging/ANVBMinus1PerCent_zpse155de2c.jpg.html)
ANVB -2%:
(http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o266/paulskvorc/Swaging/ANVBMinus2PerCent_zps6014cacc.jpg) (http://s122.photobucket.com/user/paulskvorc/media/Swaging/ANVBMinus2PerCent_zps6014cacc.jpg.html)
ANVB -3%:
(http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o266/paulskvorc/Swaging/ANVBMinus3PerCent_zps74739f6c.jpg) (http://s122.photobucket.com/user/paulskvorc/media/Swaging/ANVBMinus3PerCent_zps74739f6c.jpg.html)
ANVB Black Tip:
(http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o266/paulskvorc/Swaging/ANVBBlackTip_zps0ffc6f9d.jpg) (http://s122.photobucket.com/user/paulskvorc/media/Swaging/ANVBBlackTip_zps0ffc6f9d.jpg.html)
Hornady 125 HP - On Node:
(http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o266/paulskvorc/Swaging/Horn125HP_zps3c739259.jpg) (http://s122.photobucket.com/user/paulskvorc/media/Swaging/Horn125HP_zps3c739259.jpg.html)
Something's WRONG. I have not shot ANY bullets from this rifle except the ANVBs. It's possible I suppose, that the rifle is "bad", but I seriously doubt that. I suppose I will load up some 180s and see how it "likes" those.
Very disappointing.
Paul
QuoteThe only good news was that the new chronograph caught every shot, and I didn't even have to think about it. Small consolation when you see the groups/PATTERNS!
This may seem like a reach, but is there ANY chance the magnetospeed being strapped/attached/affixed to the barrel is messing with the vibration/harmonic nodes of the barrel timing? IOW, did you shoot for groups without it?
I don't understand how it couldn't, considering that any weight/mass changes on the end of the barrel have the potential to do so.
Then there is the disruption of the "blowby" pattern. I know you have worked hard at finding a load that offers 100% "in barrel" burn, but the residual pressure still could/should/may have some disruptive effect if it's not uniform and or consistent.
Just some thoughts.
:hanged:
WOW, WTF happened there!!
Dissect the load for me, primer, powder and weight, case etc.
The way the velocities are jumping all over it almost looks like an ignition issue.
RJ
Actually RJ, those velocities (ES and SD) while are nothing to crow about, aren't out of line with most other high-power rifles I have. If you look at the strings as a whole, most of the variation is caused by one or two high or low velocities with the rest being pretty tight.
The on-node charge is 45.3 grains of Alliant 10x. Each % step down is a 0.3-grain decrease. The Hornadys all got the same on-node charge. Primers were all Remington 9 1/2. Cases were all Privi Partizan. All got a light crimp.
I rechecked the diameter of the ANVB against the Hornady and the Sierra 220s. The ANVB is 0.3233"; the Hornady is 0.3231", and the Sierra is 0.3229". Mic'd, not caliper'd. While I didn't slug the bore of the Remington, I measured it with a caliper, and the largest dimension I could come up with was 0.322", so "too small" isn't the problem.
Jamie.270 - There is no doubt that the chronograph 'bayonet' has a measurable effect on the barrel harmonics. However, even using the poor Hornady group as a reference point, I have a difficult time seeing harmonics accounting for 3" of movement. More significantly, RANDOM movement.
Recall that the groups I shot last week were of the same size and nature as these, and that was without the bayonet. I was hoping it was a 'scope issue, but clearly not.
The vertical string you see in the first target are the sighting in shots taken at 50 yd. While 4 of them are the Hornadys, the rest are the ANVB. The point is, I was 'fiddling' with the elevation, but just barely the windage. You can see that the windage variation is very small - less than an inch. What that means is, something is happening between 50 an 100 yards. I am suspicious of the "tips". Still, if the tips were coming off between 50 and 100 yd and wreaking 'havoc', I would expect to see at least some key-holes. There are none.
Here are the next measures I plan to take:
1) Load some Nosler 180 E-Tips, (boat-tail)
2) Load some Hornady 195s, (flat-base)
3) Shoot some Milsurp 8x57, (probably boat-tails)
4) Make some "lead-tipped" 125-grain ANVBs.
5) Load the lead-tipped ANVBs about 0.030" off the lands. Currently, they are about 0.100" off the lands due to tweaking the timing. I'm going to ignore the timing and minimize the 'jump'.
6) I'm contemplating using 4831. I have a GREAT deal of faith in 4831 powder. It WORKS in ALL of my large-capacity cases. It's "too slow" for the 8x57 case to generate 'the best' muzzle velocities, but I'm inclined to try it just to see if I can do something to get small groups with 125-grain bullets. 4831 works great behind the 115-grain bullet in BOTH the 7mm RM and the 7x300 Weatherby.
Clutching at straws, I am going to calculate the relationship between the weight, length, and diameter of the 115-grain 7mm, and then see how that compares to the 8mm ANVB. Maybe I will change the ANVB's weight if those numbers don't jibe.
I have NEVER seen an 8mm rifle shoot 125-grain bullets well. No better than 1.5 MoA on a "good" day. However, I DO NOT believe that it is impossible to get 125-grain bullets to shoot out of an 8mm bore. There is no 'magic'. There has to be some combination of configurations that yield MoA or better from a 125-grain 8mm bullet. I'm going to do my best to find that combination.
I appreciate everyone's thoughts. I am completely baffled, so all ideas will be considered. If I side-step something someone suggests, I'll try to explain why.
Paul
PS - Oh yeah...
This rifle was brand new when I started with the ANVBs. It's had about 75 or so bullets through it. I have been keeping an eye on the bore to check for copper fouling, especially since the ANVB jackets are pure copper, not gilding. I have not noticed any fouling, BUT... I will be cleaning the bore before the next shooting session. While I have no belief that a fouled bore could account for three to four inches of random dispersion, I am going to "reset" the barrel to "clean".
Paul
I knew they used to make 9mm shotguns, did not know they made 8mm shotguns, too.
;)
Knowing what I "know" about LFC bullets, like the 58 grain Vmax in the .243 with it's 1:91/8 twist and the 300RUM with it's 1:10 twist and 110 grain Vmax's and the accuracy I've been able to achieve I agree there is absolutely no reason why the 125 grain ANVB's should not be made to shoot.
I assume your 700 has the 1:9.45 twist rate?
IMO, this combination can be considered a "large capacity over bore cartridge" due to the weight of the bullet, so a "slower " powder like IMR4831 might be the answer. Also powders to consider, although on the "faster" side of the spectrum, might be H4350, WW760 or H414.
I have a feeling that a load using 4831 would have to be dropped through a long drop tube and then compressed to get enough of it in the case.
Your thoughts?
RJ
I'm thinkin' that since that rifle is a modern Remington, it has way more throat than it really needs.
Especially considering that so many surplus 7.92X57 loads carry 198gr bullets.
The 8mm SST might be better suited to shoot that bullet Paul, just so it doesn't have to jump so far to engage the lands.
Every newer Remmy I have checked in the last 10 years would have been better off with 33-50% less freebore.
Have you checked the throat on this one?
How flexible are these tips? Any chance the length of the bullet is changing, maybe the tip compressing on firing? Or maybe just the tip yawing a little with the centrifigual force, but not enough to cause a tumble and keyhole?
Quote from: drinksgin;125966I knew they used to make 9mm shotguns, did not know they made 8mm shotguns, too.
;)
:greentongue::p:greentongue:
Jamie.270 - I alsways Measure a chamber's length with Hornady Lock-N-Load Chamber-All before I start reloading for that rifle. The throat on this one isn't TOO bad. I just went through everything again to make sure I knew how far off the lands I was and wanted to be. No surprises.
I want to be "close" to the lands with the E-Tip and International. If I use the same setting on the seating dies for the E-Tip, International, and the ANVB, I get almost 2/3rds of a caliber (0.216") of ANVB in the neck. This should put me ABOUT 10 thou off the lands. NORMALLY, I REALLY don't like to be that close. I prefer 30 to 80 thou off to start with. However, since I suspect that "jump" is PART of the problem, I decided to get "close" and see if the rifle shoots factory bullets at least "good" - 1.5 MoA at most.
I also drug out some 1949 Turkish Milsurp ammo. That was interesting. I disassembled one to make sure I knew what weight the bullet was and I was curious about the powder too. The bullets are 150-grain "copper washed" flat-based. The powder was 47.0 grains of a flat, square (about 2mm). Looked in great shape.
(http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o266/paulskvorc/Swaging/8x57TurkMilsurpAmmo_zps89efdbae.jpg) (http://s122.photobucket.com/user/paulskvorc/media/Swaging/8x57TurkMilsurpAmmo_zps89efdbae.jpg.html)
Notice the really strong crimp.
Here's the interesting part: I measured the length of the cartridge to the part of the bullet's ogive that reaches caliber diameter. That length on the Milsurp cartridge is within 0.005" of the length I settled on for "getting close" to the lands.
I also checked the weight/caliber relationship between the 115-grain 7mm Speer and the 130-grain Speer HP in .308. Based on the 7mm, the 8mm should weigh 130.7 grains. Based on the .308, it should weigh 136. So...
I loaded 6 each of the following to the exact same "ogival" length which puts the bullets the same distance from the lands - ABOUT 0.010":
180-grain Noselr E-Tips - RL-17
195-grain Hornady International - RL-15
130-grain ANVB with Printed Tip - 10X
125-grain Hornady Spitzers (not HPs) - 10x
I have plenty of the Turkish Milsurp ammo.
RJ - No arguments from me. I'm going to address the seating depth component first. If that produces no improvement, I'll change powders.
Oh yeah. I was breaking open a new box of primers when I noticed that Remington 9 1/2s are MAGNUM primers. :( Normally, I use CCI Large Rifle for just about every thing except the really big cases. However, I CAN'T GET ANY CCI PRIMERS BECAUSE OF ALL OF THE STUPID PANIC BUYING. :frown:mad::frown:mad::frown:mad: I strongly suspect that a measurable amount of the variability of the MVs is due to using the magnum primers.
The twist is 1:10 by my measurement.
News at 11...
Paul[/SIZE]
Glenn - I was just finishing when I saw your post.
The Printed Tips are hard. There would be no deformation upon firing. They would break (they're kinda, but not too, brittle), before they bent.
Jamie.270 - I think the Steyr SST will make life easier too. I bought some new-to-me takeoffs. Now I just have to select one and "get after it". I've got some ideas about "choking" the muzzle that I'm going to try. I'm going to leave the barrel long - about 28" - to maximize velocity, but that makes it a bit "whippy" I think. Plus "maximizing velocity" usually means higher muzzle pressures, so I am going to install a "choke" on something like 3 or 4 inches of the muzzle using an 'interference' fit sleeve maybe an inch or more in diameter.
None of which helps with the bear hunting this weekend.
Paul
More muddled thoughts. :stars:
The "bumble bee shape" of the bullet might not like the velocity it's being "buzzed" at. In the "node" it's in now it might need to go faster, with a "slower" powder. I still have the feeling that the use of a "slower" powder, albeit very compressed is what's needed.
IMO, seating depth is not as relevant as we give it credit for. I use my various loadings for my various .223's shooting bumble bee shaped projectiles as an example. For seating depth to be truly relevant each rifle would need it's own seating die, which I refuse to do, so, each rifle's bullet is seated to the same depth, but each has it's own charge of the same powder. Also, though probably not important, there are two different case manufacturers (WW and RP) All three powder charges are somewhat "up in the neck" when first dropped, but only one is truly compressed.
I have no idea how far off the lands the bullet is in any given rifle as the bullet is seated so it fits in either the "box magazine" of the 788's or the magazine of the 700SPS. I use the same seating depth regardless of bullet weight in all of the rifles. I doubt very much if all three rifles have the same "freebore".
In the case of my 300RUM, the further out I tried to seat the bullet, the less accurate it is with any weight bullet from 110 to 200 grains, so again, I seat all bullets to the recommended COAL, which just happens to be the most accurate.
RJ
Quoteso again, I seat all bullets to the recommended COAL,
Where would I look to get that "recommended COAL" for the ANVB? :)
Here's what's buggin' me about powders, seating depths, primers, etc...
I've NEVER had a high-powered rifle that shot 5" groups at 100 yards. The sabot'd .30/.22s weren't even that bad. Find the "wrongest" powder, the "wrongest" primer, seat the bullet "out" as far as you can, or as far "in" as you can get the neck to hold it, and I still can't figure out how to get 5-inch-plus groups at 100 yd. Even the Hornady 125 with the same powder, primer, brass, and seating depth, shoots better than 2". Something is WRONG. It appears to me that
something is effecting the bullet's flight after it leaves the muzzle.
Imagine that one starts with the "normal" situation of "poor" precision with 125-grain 8mm bullets - call it 2" at 100. Then,
on top of that poor starting precision, you "perturb" the bullet in flight. That's about the only way I can get to RANDOM 5-plus inches at 100. Some three-shot groups string left to right, some, with the
same load and
all other components equal, string up and down. There's
something WRONG. It's difficult for me to believe that it's "tuning".
The most likely culprit for "perturbation" is the tip. It just about has to be 'messing' with the bullets at some point in flight.
I worried about the REALLY sharp point "catching" the wind. I'm going to take a fingernail clipper and 'dull' that point. The 'problem' with the 'tip theory' is that the Black-Tipped bullets shot bad too. 1) I do NOT think they are coming off the bullet in flight, and 2) they do NOT have a sharp tip.
I'm clutching at straws in a tornado.
Paul
IIRC, didn't you shoot some without the tips?
Also wondering if the lead tip might be more stable as the whole core would be lead.
If it is a stability issue, I'm reminded of our conversation on bullets going to sleep and this brings me back to velocity, hence rpm. To get past this "node" it either needs to go slower and not what I think you're after, so faster is the key.
How much faster do you think you can push this bullet given the case capacity. "We" might only need 100 fps . . . . . . . . .
RJ
I can probably find a 100 f/s. I don't start on the edge just in case I need to go to the edge to get 'it' to shoot.
Paul
Is there any chance the (extra thick) jacket material is losing thickness uniformity in the forming process?
Or that the tubing's wall thickness wasn't uniform (enough) from the start?
Jamie.270 - Most importantly, I don't think the wall thickness could be 0.001" on one side and 0.069" on the other and cause 5 to 6 inch groups in 100 yd.
That said, dis-regarding the original wall thickness uniformity from side-to-side, the 'process' actually lends itself to "uniforming" rather than 'skewing". First, the core is swaged what is essentially 'perfectly' round. There's only about 0.003" difference between the OD of the swaged core (0.250") and the ID of the jackets (0.253"). Once the core is swaged into the jacket at something around 8,000 to 12,000 PSI of pressure, everything is "mashed" against the inside of the core seating die. Then, the whole thing gets "mashed" again in the pointing die.
Corbin prides himself on the concentricity of his dies, and I'm quite sure they are "rounder" than I am able to measure. I have measured the "roundness" of the bullets that come out of these dies, and I don't have a device precise enough to measure any 'out of round', and I can measure to 0.0001" and estimate to 0.00005".
I understand that you are referring to the center of mass not being coincident with the long axis of the center of form of the bullet. Like I said, I can 'do the math', and it would be nigh onto impossible to move the bullet in a 5" circle in 300 feet even if the jacket were "off" by the maximum possible - 0.034" - 0.001" less than the thickness of the wall.
Over the past 60 to 70 years, several people have "abused" all sorts of hunting bullets trying to get them to "fly wildly", all without success. One such case I remember very well was published in Outdoor Life or Field and Stream or Sports Afield in the early '70s and the author shot 150 grain .308 "lead tipped spitzers" out of a .30-06 (what else), after 1) cutting the noses off at a 45 degree angle, 2) bending them at a 45 degree angle, and 3) mashing their noses as if they were dropped right on the point. There was NO difference in the group sizes at 100 yd. NONE! It was very impressive.
I have conducted my own such experiments, and I have seen NO effect on group size at 100 yd regardless of how mangled the nose is. I would never argue that there is "no effect", but I truly believe that there is no MEASURABLE effect inside 150 yd, and no one would have to work very hard to convince me that there was no effect inside 200 yd. This is ONE of the areas that is so VASTLY different between hunting arms and benchrest competition.
Consequently, I am not concerned about the uniformity of the wall thickness of these jackets. The ones I have measured with a vernier caliper have all measured uniformly, and if the variation isn't large enough to see with the unaided eye, I do not believe it is big enough to make inches of difference at 100 yd.
Paul
Since you're stuck with a magnum primer, I would move over to a ball powder, and keep the load density high. Ball pawders tend to "like" magnum primers in medium sized cases anyway.
With the ES numbers the way they are, I'm thinking pressures are all over the map, with lotsa variations in the shape of the curves.
Any signs of excess pressure in the cases/primers?
I know BLC-2 leaves a little to be desired in the percentage of BIB category, but that would be my choice.
I don't have ANY experience with 10x, but from what I read, I question its suitability for this application, especially with a magnum primer.
The only other option I can see (from here) is that you are still dealing with a scope issue.
If the Turkish ammo does the same thing, it's time to change out the scope, IMO.
I think all of the suggestions and thoughts are actually "right on" in a general sense. The "thing" that's 'getting to me' is that nothing really accounts for the very large size of the groups, and very few of these things are cumulative.
I considered the scope - more than once - however there are two observations that fairly well exclude the scope. 1) When I adjusted the scope at 50 yd, the adjustments were right on, and 2) the 3-shot group of the 125 Hornady was "good enough" or "better by a lot" than the ANVBs at 100. Both of those observations strongly suggest that the 'scope 'aint broke'.
Because I have only one cartridge in which I have ever had any luck with any ball powder - H-414 in the .17 Rem - I don't have any confidence in them. Since I don't have any confidence in them, they don't come to mind and when they do, my butt starts squirming in my chair as I consider using them.
I am quite certain that a large part of the variation in MVs is due to the magnum primer in a non-magnum case. Still, I simply can't get my head around the idea that the difference in MV due to primer type can account for a 2 to 3 inch increase in group size. I am also having a difficult time with the randomness of the groups. One 3-shot groups being strung VERY wide and the next being strung VERY vertically.
I have all of the above mentioned cartridges loaded. I'll shoot them and see what happens. I don't anticipate any serious improvement, but I am hoping for 2-ish at 100 yd with all of the factory bullets. I suspect that if they are 2-ish, that changing primers will bring them in to 1-ish. The only CCI primers I have are some large rifle benchrest. I would use those to start with, but I already have all of the cartridges loaded, and since I don't think the primers make 5 to 6" groups, I don't really want to completely disassemble these and reprime with the benchrest primers. I don't really want to use the "benchrest" primers anyway because I don't think the rifles I shoot and the cartridges I load are "fine" enough that a "benchrest" primer will make a measurable difference in group size.
The .338 Win Mag is going bear hunting.
News at 11.
Paul
Quote from: gitano;126000I am quite certain that a large part of the variation in MVs is due to the magnum primer in a non-magnum case. Still, I simply can't get my head around the idea that the difference in MV due to primer type can account for a 2 to 3 inch increase in group size. I am also having a difficult time with the randomness of the groups. One 3-shot groups being strung VERY wide and the next being strung VERY vertically.
Paul
I don't think that magnum primers are the cause of the nasty groups. I can't see them varying enough to make the shots string vertically in one group, then horizontally in the next. Does not compute.
I used to use magnum primers in my .223's when I was burning H335 by the bushel. The switch to "normal" primers and Benchmark had no real effect on the teeny groups, except to make them smaller yet.
RJ
Awrat, it is 11:00, where is the picture of either Yogi or Bobo hanging from the single tree?
Come on, come on, come on!
;)
See the Campfire...
Paul
Playing with the boat is no excuse.
RJ
In this case, I think B.O.A.T stands for Bear Observation and Assault Transport!
Quote from: recoil junky;126030Playing with the boat is no excuse.
RJ
OK
There was neither "assault" nor "observation" of bears. There weren't any to be seen because even bears can't walk in 6 to 10 feet of snow. That is in large part precisely why they hibernate.
Paul
Just because the mission hasn't been successful yet, doesn't change the intended purpose of said vessel. :grin:
I stand by my assessment.
When I first got the printed tips from j0e_bl0ggs, Jamie.270 mentioned that the REALLY pointed tip might be a problem. While I acknowledged the possibility, I wanted to give the "sharpies" a try first. As I clutch at straws to try to explain what I am observing with the ANVB, these SHARP points are getting more of my attention. The really sharp point always nagged in the back of my mind, but now, given the mystery of "not terrible" at 50 yd, and horrible at 100 yd, I am rethinking the issue and I can come up with a plausible - to me - physical reason why the "really pointy tips" could be causing the "spraying" I am seeing, as well as the nonlinear precision - ~1.7 MoA at 50 yd and 4 to 6 MoA at 100.
First, let me point out that the printed tips aren't PERFECTLY centered on the bullet. Now before you say "AHA!", let me make it clear that "out of alignment" NORMAL tips ARE NOT AN ISSUE for HUNTING precision. In other words, a "bent" or "mangled" tip DOES NOT change the the group size for rifles that shoot about MOA. However...
With my new process of fitting the points to the bullets after the bullet has been swaged, there is often a very slight bit of mis-alignment of the tip with the long axis of the bullet. With a "normal" plastic tip that has a relatively "round" nose in comparison with the "printed tip" - like on a Nosler Ballistic Tip - this would be no problem. However, with the extremely sharp point of the printed tip, (it can easily pierce the skin), I think this may be a real problem. Here's why:
Consider a bullet rotating freely after it has left the barrel. In a bullet with a "not sharp" nose, (hereafter "round"), AND slightly mis-aligned with the long axis of the bullet, the center of the rotation would still encompass the "roundness" (meplat) of the tip. Therefore, the tip couldn't "grab hold" of the air streaming by it. Conversely, with a tip that essentially goes to "zero" as the printed tip does, almost ANY mis-alignment would allow the tip to "grab some air" as the "tippy tip" rotates around the long axis of the bullet. (Jamie.270, could you locate the post you made with a link to I think the Berger website, about the rotational path of a bullet that is "out of round"? I looked, but couldn't find it.)
When I play this out in my mind's eye, I can see the circle of rotation of the whole bullet getting larger and larger as the effect gets more and more pronounced as the bullet's nose gets farther and farther out of alignment with the axis of travel.
As I said, I'm clutching at straws at the moment, but this explanation is getting a little more plausible as I consider it. It fits the observations without too much 'eye squinting' - namely "not too bad" at 50 yd - say less than 2 MOA - and horrible at 100 - 4 to 6 MOA. The "something" happening between 50 and 100 yd might be explained by the "sharp" tip "grabbing" the air due to minor mis-alignment with the axis of rotation.
The solutions are: 1) "perfect" the alignment, and 2) "blunt" the sharp tip. Perfecting the alignment is difficult - but not impossible - to accomplish, and the sharper the point the more difficult it is. Blunting the existing tip is easy. I will simply take a pair of fingernail clippers and clip the tip off to something like 2mm (~0.08"). Maybe 3mm (~0.120") If this explanation is in fact the cause of the bullet's strange behavior, the diameter of the meplat needs to be larger than the mis-alignment error. That would prevent the possibility of the rotating tip "grabbing air" and getting pushed to the side.
There are "factory" bullets 'out there' with fairly sharp points. Some military full metal jackets are pretty sharp. HOWEVER, those are "monobloc" bullets. In other words, the point is not a separate part of the bullet, and misalignment - if even measurable - is very slight. I'm also noticing sharper points on some plastic-tipped hunting bullets. I believe this is achievable due to more precise machining processes that make alignment much more precise.
I can achieve the necessary precision in my swaging process, but not without modifying the printed tip a bit. That's not a big deal, as these were definitely prototypes, and if blunting them resolves the problem, then we will have learned something valuable from them and can make the next ones "mo betta".
I should be able to test this theory in the next few days.
Paul
Quote (Jamie.270, could you locate the post you made with a link to I think the Berger website, about the rotational path of a bullet that is "out of round"? I looked, but couldn't find it.)
The post is in the "Boolit Going to Sleep?" thread, here:
http://www.thehunterslife.com/forums/showthread.php?t=15072&highlight=litz&page=2
The video is still up, and is located here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KH9SCbCBHaY
[/SIZE]
Here's a VERY interesting video where the shooter purposely unbalances a variety of .22 bullets by taking a file to them.
He both unbalances them, AND grossly alters the shape of the nose/ogive.
Interestingly, at the 2:50 mark in the video, he shoots one that is obviously unbalanced, but with the nose of the bullet left intact.
It shoots straight.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=fvwp&NR=1&v=C9Dylxy3zJc
You may be on to something Paul.
Thanks, Jamie.270.
Yeah, I saw the .22 RF video. Pretty drastic modifications with respect to the percentage of the bullet's mass that was removed in the mod. I would have liked to have seen two "things":
1) A target with out the mods, and
2) A target with the mods.
I would like to have seen the percentage of weight that was removed. I may have to repeat this "experiment with a little more scientific rigor.
So I did the modification - clipped the tips - of the ANVB with the printed tip. I knocked off enough to create a 2mm meplat. Here's what they look like now.
(http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o266/paulskvorc/Swaging/ANVBClippedTip-2_zpsffe36bc8.jpg) (http://s122.photobucket.com/user/paulskvorc/media/Swaging/ANVBClippedTip-2_zpsffe36bc8.jpg.html)
If you look closely, you can see the tiny bit of mis-alignment at the edge of the mouth of the one on the right. That mis-alignment is actually less than the meplat of the "sharp" point, and that's why I didn't think it was an issue. And it may not be. I won't know until I shoot these.
I also made up some lead-tipped 125s. With this point forming die, I cannot make a meplat smaller than about 0.100" or 2.5 mm. Also, since they are the same weight as the printed tip 125s, the bearing surface is significantly smaller - about 0.250" for the lead-tipped versus the 0.354" of the printed tip. THAT means that I will not be able to get closer than about 0.068" off the lands if I seat the lead-tipped bullet to the minimum of 2/3rds of a caliber - 0.216". Here is a picture of the first three I made. The one in the middle is the last one after I figured out the depth setting on the die. It's meplat is 0.100".
(http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o266/paulskvorc/Swaging/ANVBLeadTip125g_zpsb267470e.jpg) (http://s122.photobucket.com/user/paulskvorc/media/Swaging/ANVBLeadTip125g_zpsb267470e.jpg.html)
I've got 9 of the 'clipped tip' bullets loaded up, and will shoot them with the rest of the ones I loaded up for the next test. So I'll be shooting 180-grain Nosler E-Tips, 195-grain Hornady Interntionals, 125-grain Hornday Spitzers, the Turkish Military 150-grain FMJ Spitzers, the 130-grain ANVBs with clipped printed tips, and the 125-grain ANVBs with the clipped tips.
We are currently under a "Winter Storm Warning". Four to six inches of snow, turning to freezing rain. Probably won't be shooting these any time in the next two days.
Paul
:greentongue::nana:Gonna let some typical spring weather slow you down?
With this snow a record was set for the longest snow season - 231 days since the first measurable snow.
It started snowing early this morning, and is still snowing now. Getting old.
Paul
See here for some late night musings on the issue of points: http://thehunterslife.com/forums/showthread.php?p=126076#post126076
Paul