OrbitalEllipses
Ultimate Member
Buy a case of PRIME 130gr to shoot for the class. Then reload those sweet Norma brass cases forever.
Last edited:
Reloading 6.5 Creedmoor
- Thread starter Wolfshaker
- Start date
-
- Tags
- 6.5 creedmoor reloading
The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast
Member Benefits:
No ad networks! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
Thanks for the info. Didn't even consider the Forester dies.
Forgive my ignorance, is the Norma brass that much better than Hornady brass?
OrbitalEllipses
Ultimate Member
According to those I've spoken to, yes. Personally, I can't say. Only personal reloader friend (I don't load) bought something like a hundred empty cases to reload rather than buying the factory Hornady offering. There should be information out there on specifically what is better about the Norma, but I definitely recall hearing about uniformity. Benefit of the PRIME is you get to shoot and fireform it for the same price as just the brass; since you're looking to load I'd figure I'd inform you of another option.
I mean, I have like ~120 Hornady cases if you want to buy them to figure out if they're any good.
120 6.5 Hornady brass? How much you want? If he doesn't take them, I'd be interested.
EWF
Member
I'd be interested too!
I have a stock pile of brass forming, so thanks for the offer but if someone else wants them please don't hold them for me.
At the moment, I am brakeing in my rifle and trying to learn what it likes, so using factory ammo. Also allows me to fireform the brass.
Found some H4350 at Clyde's today. It was their last one.
They also had a bunch of CCI and Winchester primers in stock, not the bench rest or match though.
Now if I can find some 140 gr ELD-M bullets.
They also had a bunch of CCI and Winchester primers in stock, not the bench rest or match though.
Now if I can find some 140 gr ELD-M bullets.
If you need some 140gr eldm, I can spare a few and maybe some cci BR primers
Thanks for the offer. PM sent
Bumping this for some assistance and quoting a post from another thread.
Ok I ended up buying two lbs of AA4350 to reload 6.5CM. There is no load data on Accurate's website for this powder in 6.5CM. After a ton of searching I was able to find only a few references to loads of AA4350 on Snipers Hide forums. There was only post with loads using 140gr projectiles and 24" barrel, Hornady Brass and CCI primers at 42gr. A second post where a member had contacted Accurate and they recommended 43.5gr max load 103% compacted. I didn't want to use this outright so I did find load data from Hornady for 120gr Amax as well as Accurate listed data for 260 Remington with 140gr Amax. After comparing all of these references in a data table, I decided it would be safe to test loads from 39.2 to 42.8.
Today was my first chance to test 3 rounds of each load and I'm a bit puzzled by the results.
1) all 10 groups were pretty tight 7/10 were 0.6moa or better and the two best groups were .42 and .46 I was expecting more of a spread, is this uncommon? Should I expect the accuracy nodes to be better than .42moa?
2) the max load of 42.8 gr had a Mv of 2659 fps I was expecting closer to 2800 fps. The cases show no signs of over pressure and and I'm still about 0.7 gr from the unposted max, I'm wondering if it makes sense to test further. Could I expect any reasonable improvement.
3) today was cold. does the lower temperature have and noticeable impact on velocity?
Here are the two best groups.
Is there any advantage if choosing the slower/lower pressure group over the higher velocity group?
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Ok I ended up buying two lbs of AA4350 to reload 6.5CM. There is no load data on Accurate's website for this powder in 6.5CM. After a ton of searching I was able to find only a few references to loads of AA4350 on Snipers Hide forums. There was only post with loads using 140gr projectiles and 24" barrel, Hornady Brass and CCI primers at 42gr. A second post where a member had contacted Accurate and they recommended 43.5gr max load 103% compacted. I didn't want to use this outright so I did find load data from Hornady for 120gr Amax as well as Accurate listed data for 260 Remington with 140gr Amax. After comparing all of these references in a data table, I decided it would be safe to test loads from 39.2 to 42.8.
Today was my first chance to test 3 rounds of each load and I'm a bit puzzled by the results.
1) all 10 groups were pretty tight 7/10 were 0.6moa or better and the two best groups were .42 and .46 I was expecting more of a spread, is this uncommon? Should I expect the accuracy nodes to be better than .42moa?
2) the max load of 42.8 gr had a Mv of 2659 fps I was expecting closer to 2800 fps. The cases show no signs of over pressure and and I'm still about 0.7 gr from the unposted max, I'm wondering if it makes sense to test further. Could I expect any reasonable improvement.
3) today was cold. does the lower temperature have and noticeable impact on velocity?
Here are the two best groups.
Is there any advantage if choosing the slower/lower pressure group over the higher velocity group?
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
How far apart were the charge weights? Each gun will shoot differently but its a good thing your shooting under 1 MOA overall. Accuracy nodes better than .42MOA from a bone stock rifle? I guess it CAN happen, but I would be happy with that as a starting point for sure.
Don't worry about speed/FPS as much as accuracy, you can dial for elevation as long as they hit at the same spot.
Try shooting 5 shot groups or larger vs 3 shot groups. Consistency matters more than anything.
E.Shell
Ultimate Member
IMR-4350 burns slightly faster in the 6.5CM/.260 class cartridges. This means you will reach your OCW and maximum charge weight sooner, and at lower velocity.
I was quite pleased with my first IMR-4350 load in a .260, one hole groups at 100 yards, but in the field, long range trajectory was more comparable to a .308. Chronographing later confirmed what was already obvious - velocity was about the same as a .308...ugh. In a cartridge with 30% less barrel life than a .308 and so much more potential, IMR-4350 is a waste.
Agreed 100%. And H-4350 is probably what you'll be happiest with. Micrometer dies are not necessarily more precise and their main utility is to return to a given setting, which doesn't matter to most shooters, myself included.
I'd agree, and wish I had realized this before dumping extra money into fancy dies when a standard set of decent dies will work.
IMHO, this is the very best approach. If neck sizing solves some kind of problem for you, your full length sizing technique is wrong.
One of the interesting things about precision handloading and long range is that there are so many shooting disciplines with so many variations in performance requirements. Everybody want to handload like a 100 yard benchrest competitor and handle their rifles like a milspec sniper - two VASTLY different disciplines that are incompatible in more ways than they are similar.
Most of the time, as in non-benchrest quality rifles, neck sizing works against pure precision, despite "intuition" and "feelings" to the contrary. In most production guns, a very tight fit to the chamber, the very goal of neck sizing, forces bullet misalignment in the throat and CREATES issues.
For many years, the world was thought to be flat, and neck sizing was thought to be necessary for best brass life and best accuracy. We are in another century now.
Forster dies are good dies, and setting the full length sizer to barely bump the shoulder is the way that produces best results in several ways.
I would definitely NOT fool with separate neck sizing and body dies, unless loading for a custom benchrest rifle. Even then, accuracy will eventually decline and you'll typically have to full length size to restore it.
Go with the CCIs first. I think the Winchesters are a little hot (increased brisance) to produce consistent loads in this capacity case.
Research "OCW" and don't worry so much about absolute precision (as defined by statistically insignificant 3 and 5 shot group samples). Group sizes are too easily influenced by too many factors, plus, you will often find the results you mention below that initially seem perplexing.
A good rifle will shoot almost any reasonable load well. It is typical to find very little differences in absolute group sizes and these differences are often due to the shooter and/or environmental parameters. Once we have established that the rifle is shooting several loads in a series with a given set of components with acceptable accuracy, we need to look for stable velocity in order to be successful at the longer distances this cartridge was designed for.
Velocity variations are almost impossible to see at 100 yards, but as distances increase, we'll begin to see vertical stringing due to differing flight times.
It definitely does pay to pursue testing to the point where you see signs of pressure.
Please realize that the published loads provided published performance in THEIR rifle/test barrel with THEIR components. YOU have different EVERYTHING. Is it therefore reasonable to expect exactly the same results? Clearly not. A very clear illustration of this is the variance in data from one manual to another.
Their 'maximum' charge is not at all guaranteed to be safe in your rifle, and they will profusely tell you that so you don't have grounds to sue them. The flip side is that THEIR maximum may also be well below YOUR maximum.
This is why we must carefully approach maximum charges and stop before the book says so if we encounter excess pressure. By the same token, if their maximum charge doesn't show excess pressures, you may find yourself safely running charge weights that exceed their book max...so what? A safe load in your rifle may not be a safe load in their rifle, and a safe load in their rifle may not be a safe load in your rifle. Test for yourself and get past the perception that the book overrules your results
Further, most consistent performance is often found at just below maximum charge weights. Again, research OCW, and you may also find this helpful:
http://www.shell-central.com/Powder1.html
Familiarize yourself with pressure indications and be careful.
Yes, it can. This is why many long range shooters have gravitated toward Hodgden's 'extreme' powders. I have found IMR powders to be quite sensitive to temperature changes and don't use them for long range.
Both groups indicate rifle handling or trigger issues, but both show potential and I would personally work more toward finding stable velocity and working with that.
No, in fact, best loads usually run toward higher, but still safe, pressures.
There is a 'low node' that often provides good performance at pressures somewhat lower than the high node, but barrel life (measured in milliseconds) is unaffected and thus you're leaving money on the table when you could be enjoying less drop, drift and deviation.
Don't get hung up on absolute velocity, as Speed3 stated above, it amounts to a click or three one way or another. For long range precision, the goal should be consistent velocities, wherever they may live.
You may not realize that this inane advertisement for Tapatalk can be eliminated by a simple setting.
Mike3888
Mike3888
Don't count out reloader 17 for the creedmoor. I haven't tested any yet since my bolt build is not done. I have some samples ready to go with h4350 and re17. Good luck
Speed Thank you for the reply. I appreciate the info that you have provided in this and other threads. FWIW my charges were about 10% apart 0.4gr. After reading Ed's Thread and glancing over the information linked about the OCW method, I realize I'm on the right track but still a lot to do.
Ed, Wow this is a lot to absorb.
OK, Mind Blown! I'll take your word. Time to read more and put away the neck sizing die.
Probably very true in my case during yesterday's testing. The wind was blowing with 15mph gusts and I really didnt think it would make much difference at 100yds. Also it was cold, I was wearing gloves, it was hard to maintain a good cheek weld and I still consider myself an amateur shooter. All factors which could cause inconsistencies. In fact in retrospect probably not a good day to be testing.
Just checked out the link for a second and realize I'll be dedicating the rest of the evening to reading your link and the referenced sub-links. Thank You!
This part is a bit new to me. I just got my first Chronograph. The 5 Factory A-Max 120gr loads I shot before testing my loads were running Mv:2868 with an SD: 13.6. For my test loads my SD ranged from 9 to 44. What should I be looking for with respect to Standard Deviation? Is the answer simply as close to 0 as possible...
It seems that H4350 is very difficult to find, so my concern was working up a load with a powder that was not going to be available when I needed it. I read some of the same info you mentioned about IMR4350 being a bit faster which I why I wanted to try AA4350 which is actually lower than H4350. At this point I'm going to continue testing if for nothing else but to at least to give back some data to the community. If the powder can perform at consistent velocity it may be a keeper.
I'm laughing I guess I never noticed it before. I'll change it to I Love http://www.centralvirginiatactical.com unless I can convince Chad to pay me to change it to I love https://www.schooloftheamericanrifle.com
Putting together that detailed of a response is what makes this community great. The 15-30 minutes of your time is really appreciated and I'm sure those reading the conversation down the road will find it as informative as I have. I'm looking forward to the April 22nd long range beginner class. I don't think I can imagine how much information I'll have to absorb that weekend. I'll come with an open mind. See you then.
Thanks again,
John
Without a doubt.
It's very rare to encounter the individual who can combine a vast subject knowledge, with an equal ability to clearly and effectively communicate that knowledge to others.
The former attribute can come for any number of people with time, training, dedication, and a passion for the subject matter.
The latter trait might best be described as being a gift.
Jerry M
Ultimate Member
Tagging in to continue my education.
Need quick opinion on determining upper pressure limit. From what I've read one sign of overpressure is flattened primers. When I examined my fired cases at the highest charge I see only a slight flattening. I'm thinking ok I've got room to go up. Good. Then I compared my fired reloads to an unfired factory round and a fired factory round and I was surprised that all of the factory rounds look totally flattened and expanded into the chamfer of the primer pocket.
From left to right:
1) Unfired factory round
2) Fired reload at my lowest test charge
3) Fired reload at my highest charge
4) Fired factory round
So this has me wondering two things obviously 10 factory rounds cannot be near the pressure max. Is using primer flattening even reliable? Second thing is that my hand loads were only neck sized so they were snug in the breech. Is it possible that being snug the primers just done push out like they may in a factory round which has a bit more play?
From left to right:
1) Unfired factory round
2) Fired reload at my lowest test charge
3) Fired reload at my highest charge
4) Fired factory round
So this has me wondering two things obviously 10 factory rounds cannot be near the pressure max. Is using primer flattening even reliable? Second thing is that my hand loads were only neck sized so they were snug in the breech. Is it possible that being snug the primers just done push out like they may in a factory round which has a bit more play?
Last edited:
E.Shell
Ultimate Member
Welcome to the dark side...
Here is the basic mechanism:
Premise #1: You cannot drill a rifle bore to be perfectly straight.
First, the material itself precludes boring a straight hole, with inclusions of varying hardness. Inclusions can be local variations in the alloy, leading to harder or softer areas, or inclusions can be contaminants, such a tiny fragment of silicate, any of which can draw or deflect the cutter.
Then, and probably more influential, is resident oscillations. Oscillation is inherent to all machine work, with weight, precision and rigidity working against oscillation. Big, heavy machines with well fitting, heavy duty components oscillate very little, cut with minimal deflection and leave very small irregularities in the finish. Better machines cut truer and oscillate less than lesser machines, but they ALL oscillate to some degree.
When you make a long rip cut on a table saw, you do not get a smooth edge, even though the blade spins true and rotates around a fixed axis in both the x and y directions. You will see evidence of machine oscillation in the form of radial grooves left in the work.
In a bored hole, you will see oscillation manifest itself in two ways. One is the surface finish as the drill point prescribes a groove with its own imbalance and/or runout. This groove is reamed out prior to rifling. The second is that the bore itself does a long slow spiral in accordance with the machine's rate and degree of oscillation. This cannot be fixed in a modern, contoured barrel, although there was a time when when it was so bad, barrels were held to a razor thin straightedge, rotated eyeballed and physically straightened.
Premise #2: Barrels are bored first, then contoured.
This makes it easy to center the bore at both breech and muzzle ends, doesn't it? No matter what degree of oscillation and how crazy off-center the exit, we can make it centered if we simply center on the hole at each end and contour after boring. Evidence of this is easy to find, we simply section an old barrel a couple inches at a time and measure the degree at which the bore wanders around. It is usually bad enough to be visible when viewed in this fashion...but otherwise hidden from most eyes and it really makes no difference anyway...unless...
...we ASSume the hole at the muzzle is directly in line with the bore when we cut the chamber. If we acknowledge that the bore does a long slow spiral, and we utilize the traditional method of setting up a barrel, we have to realize we are gambling with throat alignment.
Traditionally, one would set the barrel up on a lathe and spin it, indicating the bore true at each end. Once the barrel runs true between centers, the reamer is driven in, directly toward the muzzle, the pilot fits the bore and guides the cutter in perfectly straight...right? Not necessarily... In fact, it seems to only be about a 5% of the time that the alignment will be perfect, and cases like that are known as "hummers". Hummers are the occasional barrel one gets that just absolutely shoot everything great no matter what.
In the other 95% of barrels chambered this way, accuracy often will be fine, but not astounding. I have examined a lot of rifles barrels with a Hawkeye borescope and when a chamber is cut at a slight angle to the throat, it is easily seen.
Gordy Gritters is a precision gunsmith that consistently makes championship rifles and he discovered how to make every one a "hummer". He lets the muzzle "run wild" and simply indicates the barrel at the chamber end, both at the butt end of the barrel and up into the throat. In doing so, he disregards the position of the muzzle as it spins in the lathe and allows the reamer to enter straight into the throat, even though the throat isn't looking at the muzzle.
So, most rifles are NOT done like Gordy Gritters does them and there will be a wide range of alignment between the throat and the cartridge body. This range is between "almost perfect" and "this damn barrel won't shoot anything".
Now, to the neck sizing problem. If we neck size, we do so under the (unreliable) premise that a better fit of the cartridge case to the chamber leads to better bullet alignment in the bore and this better accuracy. If you understand my example above, you'll see that this applies to only about 5% of the production rifles out there, and by accident and in random fashion. There are a lot of good gunsmiths that have adopted this method and are routinely turning out hummers, but there are a lot that still use traditional methods and turn out a decent shooter, but the throat is not perfect.
If we neck size a case several times, it very closely fits the reamed chamber area and the bullet is presented to the throat quite consistently. This would be great news if your production rifle is in that magic 5%, but the odds say it is not.
The degree of misalignment is usually very small, and a part of the concept of a properly functioning "system" is that the components of the system compliment each other and promote function as a whole. When the system is working correctly, we can forgive this common misalignment by judiciously full length resizing and providing a little slack around the cartridge case so the bullet isn't forced or jammed into the throat at that minor misalignment angle. The bullet can be started into the throat and if the case can be allowed to move slightly in the chamber, then it can shift to allow better bullet alignment.
Lead is a 'dead metal', copper's elasticity isn't much better, and if we start a bullet into the throat with a little misalignment, it will slump into the lands under engraving pressure and it does NOT rattle around and straighten itself up. It MUST enter straight if it is to spin around it's center of form.
For many years, non-target shooters neck sized to promote brass longevity. The only time you see a substantial improvement in brass life when neck sizing is when the full length dies is providing too much shoulder setback and thus stretching the case. This ultimately leads to case head separation and excessive trimming.
When setting your full length sizing die using the manufacturer's generic instructions, please understand the HIS goals are not the same as YOUR goals. Strange, but true.
Simply put, the manufacturer wants every cartridge loaded in his dies to fit every standard rifle out there chambered for that cartridge. If you follow his directions, you will get that result. No matter how much resizing we actually need, we will blindly follow the die makers desire to mash the piss out of every one and have it fit anything.
Problem is, our goal is to have adequate working clearance (mentioned by Marc357 above), balanced with best brass life. This is achieved when your full length die just bumps the shoulder enough to provide working clearance, some 0.0015" to 0.002", NOT SAAMI minimum.
Clearly a conflict in goals, but that's what makes it a thinking man's game.
Best brass life happens with the resized cartridge is only sized enough to fit the rifle it came from/is intended for. If we carefully set our die to this point, brass life will be limited more by fatigue factors other than stretching, such a loose primer pockets or neck/shoulder cracks.
This is where it pays to understand that some data may not tell us the story we are looking for.
Yes, "0" would be optimum. The real test is the size of your vertical deviation when you put it into context of your rifle and the ranges you are shooting.
If you are shooting F-Class, the X ring is 5" and shot as far away as 1,000 yards. Because the X ring area is circular, the more vertical you have, the less room for lateral error you have. For example, if you had zero vertical deviation, you'd have the entire 5" width of the X ring to play with. If your group goes 3" tall, you only have about 2" to play with before your high bullets start falling out at 10 and 2, and low ones start going out at 4 and 8.
How much total velocity variation (extreme spread) at your muzzle velocity would it take to get you out of the X ring? 10 fps ES/5 fps SD?
Use your ballistic software to find out: Use your lowest velocity and find your drop in inches, then use your highest velocity and see what the difference in impact is at your desired distance.
With regard to standard deviation, we look at it two ways.
First, SD should be half of your extreme spread. More than half indicates an uneven distribution of velocities, whereas if the load was truly stable, half of the shots would be on each side of average. If many shots are in the higher end of your velocity bracket and one occasional shot is very low, the average comes down a little but it indicates an instability and your SD numbers would be higher.
Second is that it gives us an idea of velocity variation and what we can expect on target. if we have an average velocity and our SD is about half of our extreme spread, it means we can expect a more or less even distribution of hits - half above center and half below. Standard deviation that is half of our extreme spread indicates some degree of stability and uniformity, in that our dispersion will be evenly distributed and close to the average.
H-4350 wasn't hard to find until everybody discovered it was optimum for the 6.5 Creedmoor.
I'd be very interested to see your ultimate findings with the AA version.
Mike 3888 above mentioned RE-17 and that would probably be my next choice for experimentation. When it first came out, a lot of people were throwing a lot of impressive numbers around, like "150 fps more from my .260", but I don't see that many people using it. I haven't tried it because I have more than enough H-4350 to burn the barrel up and it's been working great - if it's not broke, don't fix it.
Back to your 120 grain bullet at some 2,800 fps. I would expect you to see another 150 to 200 fps from this bullet with the 6.5 CM. I suspect you'll be able to get another few increments up and while doing so, your SD should clean up.
Users who are viewing this thread
Latest posts
-
-
‘Why is nothing being done?’: Concerns grow about drug use, fighting in Montgomery Co. school bathrooms (13 Viewers)- Latest: RFBfromDE
-
Forum statistics
Latest threads
-
‘Why is nothing being done?’: Concerns grow about drug use, fighting in Montgomery Co. school bathrooms (13 Viewers)
- Started by RFBfromDE
- Replies: 7
-
-
-
-
-
-
Hair-trigger posting... please include more than just the "headline"- Started by Mr H
- Replies: 13