Messages

Hello folks! Been a while since I've been on the forum. I knew someone here would have the answer I'm looking for, so here I am again!
 
I would like to make a load for my Remington R-15 (AR) in .223, 1:9 twist, with the Nosler 60gr Partition. I have done some load workup with this bullet over 23.5 to 25 gr of Ramshot TAC using a WSR primer and found the best load was around 24.5gr - but even this load was not that great at around 2" for 5 shots. This rifle shoots just about everything else I've tried in it under 1" for 5 shots and will put my best loads under .5" for 5 shots. These "best" loads include 77gr SMKs down to 50gr V-maxes, so I don't think the 60gr weight is the issue.
 
Has anybody found accuracy with the 60gr partition in a .223 or 5.56 chambered rifle? What am I missing? Or is this just not a very accurate projectile?

I went back and re-read the first part of this old post and saw your experiments. I understand your results in regards to weight vs capacity.

 The external dimensions of a case after resizing will vary based on the hardness of the brass. In order for your test to be foolproof and your internal reamer to generate cases that have the same effective capacity, the cases would have to start out with identical external dimensions, right? So you would need to do both operations; capacity measuring and reaming, with the brass in the sizer die or a similar device that maintains the external dimensions and does not allow for varience caused by brass spring-back.

Being devils advocate here for your benefit....

That's it. Make them all the same weight, and they will all have the same capacity.

Or you could just use the same case and see if accuracy improves first.

Take the brass off the outside instead of the inside.
 
Sort brass by velocity first though, and see if your capacity and velocity are actually directly related.

"It" means make the case capacities equal.

I think that the problems created with neck tension will outweigh your gains from identical case capacity.

I can think of a better way to do it and I bet you can too. But I really think your gains in accuracy will be hard to record.

Nice groups! That RUM is really working for you.

The problem with H110 powder is that it doesn't ignite reliably (and isn't recommended by the maker) at pressures less than ~21,000 PSI. Folks who try it usually end up with a bullet stuck in the barrel sooner or later. Velocities likely won't be consistent, so as a minimum your accuracy will likely suffer.
 
If I recall correctly, Jay Edwards had this sort of trouble with it, and wouldn't use H110 in his .45 Colt handguns because of it. Seems like he said something to that affect here once back when I was new with using it.
 
If you try it, be sure to check your barrel for any bullet that might have stopped in the barrel. Seriously.
 
Daryl

Yep. That's what I was getting at up there ^ H110 and Win296 are the same powder too - so keep that in mind in case you run across that number. Check the new Hodgdon load data that lists the same loads for both powders....

Until we get load data from a reputable source (somebody with pressure test equipment) we are still just guessing about all of this stuff - since there is no way to load this bullet to "max pressure". If you feel brave, run the same numbers in QL as before, but use 32,000psi for your ceiling with H110 and AA9.
 
And while there indeed may be a velocity limit for cast bullets, we are probably not going to find it in any .45 colt - with gas checks, proper alloys, and lube.

Experts! Right! ;-)
 
Someone should have told those guys with the '73 Winchesters - that's 1873.
 
My take on these things is that they are marketed well, serve no purpose, hurt nothing, but are going to make a lot of money because they look deadly - pretty much the way I feel about all bullets with plastic or rubber as a component.
 
The extra case capacity these things take up (due to length) when compared to a similar hollow point (or better yet, a well designed cast bullet) reduces max velocity enough that any BC gains are lost when you look at trajectory of both projectiles when loaded to the same PRESSURE.

Keep in mind that the primary reason Hornady came up with these wasn't for BC; it was for the rubber nose to be used in tube-fed rifles.
 
Paul

Flat points, soft points, and hollow points work find in tube mags and are cheaper No rubber nose needed and same or better listed BC... still not getting the point.
 
Throw these in your BC calc compared to that Lee 452-255 RF?

I would say that you will probably not be happy trying to run H110 at that low of a pressure, but try it and see. DEFINITELY use a magnum primer.
 
Also, I think the 1894 .45 colt will take a little more than 14,000psi I run 32,000psi loads in my Ruger Bisley.  If you are going to keep pressures that low, you will probably want something that burns faster than H110 - such as Hodgdon Longshot, HS6, Power Pistol or a powder with a similar burning rate as those.
 
I can't give you a load for these bullets in your rifle, but I would not hesitate to try 23gr of H110 under either of them and work up in my own gun until primers were uniformly flattened without other signs of excess pressure. The link below might give you an idea of what your 1894 is capable of:
 
http://www.leverguns.com/articles/fryxell/marlin_1894.htm
 
But to be honest, I'm pretty happy with cast bullets in my .45LC and Hornady wimped out by not making their .45LC LeverEvolution load a +P for strong firearms. I might have been interested at that point.
 
The BC of the 225gr is only listed at .145. That's worse than a Lee .452-255RF listed at .210.... Pretty red tips sell a lot of them though!

Be careful messing with these LeverEvolution bullets and fired factory cases.
 
The .444 Marlin factory loaded LE cases are quite a bit shorter than standard .444 cases to allow the crimp groove to be further back on the case - so crimping any other bullet in the cannelure will reduce powder capacity. Using the same bullet in a standard case would yeild too long of an OAL.
 
In the .45 Colt or .44 mag do you actually gain anything substantial by using these bullets?

Funny that this thread has come back up... my friend wanted something I had, and I now own that 444P Outfitter!
 
And really, it is quieter than my 5R .308 with a full load AND kicks about the same!!! No B.S.!:eek:
 
Shooting either a handloaded 250gr XTP over (I think) 50gr of RE7 OR factory Lever Evolutions yeilds more wallop than a 265gr factory Remington load. Gun has AO/XS peep and ramp on it. I need to work with it more as the large rear ghost ring is not working for me very well for 100yd groups. I ordered the rear ghost ring that is threaded to accept smaller Wiliams apertures and put it on, but have not fired it since. BUT, I can crank off 5 into a 3" shoot-n-see offhand at 25yds surprisingly fast using that big rear ring. Anybody tried that Lee 430-310RF mould in a .444? Is the nose short enough?

What's a good go-to charge to try for IMR-4064, and a 180gr bullet in a .30-06? I know somebody on here has a pet load....