Reloader's Nest Forum
Reloader's Nest Forum
Home | Profile | Active Topics | Members | Private Messages | Search | FAQ
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

 All Forums
 Reloading General
 General forum
 Book load/ real world differences
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
Next Page
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic
Page: of 2

caveman0101
Senior Member



USA
238 Posts

Posted - Jul 26 2017 :  22:12:06  Show Profile Send caveman0101 a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Tried out a Nosler #8 book load 280Rem 150gr bullet 56gr MRP. Book says they used a 26" barrel, mine is a 28". Book says speed should have been 3020, actual was 2810. The other loads I tried were expectedly faster than book, what the hell happened to this one?

"It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt" Lincoln/Twain

Kosh75287
Advanced Member



USA
796 Posts

Posted - Jul 26 2017 :  23:36:03  Show Profile Send Kosh75287 a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Different brass? Different projectile? Different chamber specs? Different way the shooter was holding his head, as he squeezed the trigger?

God bless Jeff Cooper

Carpe SCOTCH!
Go to Top of Page

Hockeynick39
Advanced Member



USA
4690 Posts

Posted - Jul 27 2017 :  07:03:12  Show Profile  Send Hockeynick39 an AOL message Send Hockeynick39 a Private Message  Reply with Quote
QL predicts 2911 fps with an oal of 3.330". Were you expecting to be right on or exceeding the book velocity? QL is also +/- roughly 200 fps on rifle loads for prediction vs. chronograph too. Another thing, you may be at a point of diminishing returns with the barrel length.

Cartridge : .280 Rem.
Bullet : .284, 150, Nosler BalTip 28150
Useable Case Capaci: 60.002 grain H2O = 3.896 cm³
Cartridge O.A.L. L6: 3.330 inch = 84.58 mm
Barrel Length : 28.0 inch = 711.2 mm
Powder : Norma MRP

Predicted data by increasing and decreasing the given charge,
incremented in steps of 2.0% of nominal charge.
CAUTION: Figures exceed maximum and minimum recommended loads !

Step Fill. Charge Vel. Energy Pmax Pmuz Prop.Burnt B_Time
% % Grains fps ft.lbs psi psi % ms

-20.0 83 48.08 2476 2042 28697 8147 90.8 1.717
-18.0 85 49.28 2541 2151 30726 8412 92.2 1.671
-16.0 87 50.48 2607 2264 32908 8666 93.5 1.625
-14.0 90 51.69 2674 2381 35258 8905 94.7 1.580
-12.0 92 52.89 2740 2500 37791 9131 95.8 1.536
-10.0 94 54.09 2806 2623 40525 9340 96.7 1.486
-08.0 96 55.29 2872 2748 43472 9531 97.6 1.439
-06.0 98 56.49 2938 2876 46666 9704 98.3 1.393
-04.0 100 57.70 3004 3006 50119 9857 98.9 1.349 ! Near Maximum !
-02.0 102 58.90 3070 3139 53863 9988 99.4 1.306 ! Near Maximum !
+00.0 104 60.10 3135 3274 57926 10097 99.7 1.265 ! Near Maximum !
+02.0 106 61.30 3200 3411 62345 10183 99.9 1.225 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+04.0 108 62.50 3264 3549 67156 10245 100.0 1.187 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+06.0 110 63.71 3328 3690 72406 10291 100.0 1.150 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+08.0 112 64.91 3392 3832 78148 10332 100.0 1.114 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+10.0 115 66.11 3455 3976 84419 10368 100.0 1.079 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!

Results caused by ± 10% powder lot-to-lot burning rate variation using nominal charge
Data for burning rate increased by 10% relative to nominal value:
+Ba 104 60.10 3281 3585 72004 9645 100.0 1.164 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Data for burning rate decreased by 10% relative to nominal value:
-Ba 104 60.10 2922 2843 45957 10025 94.8 1.397
Go to Top of Page

MIKESBARRO
Advanced Member



USA
3180 Posts

Posted - Jul 27 2017 :  08:09:02  Show Profile Send MIKESBARRO a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Kosh75287

Different brass? Different projectile? Different chamber specs? Different way the shooter was holding his head, as he squeezed the trigger?



OK...not trying to start a p*ssing match here. What does head position and trigger squeeze have to do with velocity???

Mike

Awards are like hemmoroids......if you live long enough, every asshole gets one.
Go to Top of Page

Shastaboat
Advanced Member



USA
9124 Posts

Posted - Jul 27 2017 :  08:29:20  Show Profile Send Shastaboat a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by MIKESBARRO

quote:
Originally posted by Kosh75287

Different brass? Different projectile? Different chamber specs? Different way the shooter was holding his head, as he squeezed the trigger?



OK...not trying to start a p*ssing match here. What does head position and trigger squeeze have to do with velocity???

Mike



He was being facetious.
Go to Top of Page

Shastaboat
Advanced Member



USA
9124 Posts

Posted - Jul 27 2017 :  08:32:13  Show Profile Send Shastaboat a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Since the recipe makers have taken over publishing Reloading manuals, reloading data does not transverse in to accurate recipes.
Go to Top of Page

mikld
Advanced Member



USA
657 Posts

Posted - Jul 27 2017 :  13:34:34  Show Profile Send mikld a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by MIKESBARRO

quote:
Originally posted by Kosh75287

Different brass? Different projectile? Different chamber specs? Different way the shooter was holding his head, as he squeezed the trigger?



OK...not trying to start a p*ssing match here. What does head position and trigger squeeze have to do with velocity???

Mike


I suspect the reference to head position was meant "tongue -in cheek". But tongue position will affect muzzle velocities. I can get 126 fps more outta my Garand if I keep my tongue in my mouth......

Reloading manuals are not exacting formula. They are just published results of the components used and equipment used for testing, which will often differ greatly from what a reloader/shooter uses...

Vocatus atque non vocatus, Dues aderit.
At least I've learned how to stand on my own two knees...

Edited by - mikld on Jul 27 2017 13:37:06
Go to Top of Page

Land_Owner
Average Member



USA
115 Posts

Posted - Jul 27 2017 :  14:29:19  Show Profile  Visit Land_Owner's Homepage Send Land_Owner a Private Message  Reply with Quote
We cannot recreate the temperature, humidity, altimeter, barametric pressure, et al conditions within which they tested at their indoor range, (assumed) through their "dimentionally correct" test barrel, and "calibrated" chronometer, against your results on an outdoor range (assumed), through a "nominally correct" barrel. So, variation is the spice of life.

Add powder for greater velocity if the new charge is within the Mfg's published range and test again. I believe your round went "bang" and the paper target was hit. Sounds like a WIN to me.

If it was easy, anybody could do it!
Go to Top of Page

MIKESBARRO
Advanced Member



USA
3180 Posts

Posted - Jul 27 2017 :  15:35:59  Show Profile Send MIKESBARRO a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Duh...senior moment

Mike

Awards are like hemmoroids......if you live long enough, every asshole gets one.
Go to Top of Page

RaySendero
Advanced Member



USA
635 Posts

Posted - Jul 27 2017 :  18:27:42  Show Profile Send RaySendero a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Shastaboat

Since the recipe makers have taken over publishing Reloading manuals, reloading data does not transverse in to accurate recipes.




recipe, recipes ???


Ray
Go to Top of Page

Zero333
Advanced Member



Canada
810 Posts

Posted - Jul 27 2017 :  20:38:06  Show Profile Send Zero333 a Private Message  Reply with Quote
By definition alone, our handloads are recipes since a "recipe" is "something that is likely to lead to a particular outcome".

About the topic... Worst one I've had was Hodgdon's 243win data with H-4831 and 105gr Amax.

I used the same brass, same primer, same powder, but my barrel was 2" shorter than their 24" test barrel and their max load in my rifle I wouldn't even use as a starting load.

Hodgdon's max was 41 gr H-4831 making 2,846 fps.
My rifle averaged 2,594 fps with 41 gr.

A few consecutive trips to the range testing this combo, and I still have not found a max charge with H-4831, but I stopped at 45.8 gr (4.8gr above Hodgdon's MAX), getting 2,916 fps avg.

There is a good explanation for some of the difference in velocity and pressure, but still can't explain the majority of the nonconformity.

I was testing in the Winter ( temp was -6c / 21f first test, -11c / 12f on second day, and -14c / 6f on the third day)...
I also seated the bullet farther out at 2.790" while Hodgdon's seating depth was at 2.760".

On the other hand... Their H-1000 data with the same bullet was quite close in velocity to my own testing after taking into consideration 50fps loss from the 2" shorter barrel and the cold weather I was testing the H-1000 in. (I do lot's of shooting in the Winter. No waiting for the barrel's to cool off !!!)




Treat that trigger like it’s your first date, not like you’ve been married to it for 20 years.
Go to Top of Page

caveman0101
Senior Member



USA
238 Posts

Posted - Jul 27 2017 :  22:10:39  Show Profile Send caveman0101 a Private Message  Reply with Quote
That is what I saw to Zero. With H1000 and RL22 I shot a bit faster than the book loads for them. The odd ball was MRP and it wasn't even close. I'm from the south but live in Colorado so I've got some experience with developing a load at 7500ft 30F 10% humidity, then driving to MS and shooting the same load at 400ft 60F 85% humidity. Frankly, the biggest difference I've seen in velocity has been less than 100fps.Actually, the biggest differences I've found have come here in the mountains finding a load during the summer 85F and then going hunting in late season -15F.
Go to Top of Page

RaySendero
Advanced Member



USA
635 Posts

Posted - Jul 27 2017 :  22:45:55  Show Profile Send RaySendero a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Zero333



By definition alone, our handloads are recipes since a "recipe" is "something that is likely to lead to a particular outcome".





I agree.

My post was an inside joke to the boat.

Ray
Go to Top of Page

Shastaboat
Advanced Member



USA
9124 Posts

Posted - Jul 28 2017 :  11:03:30  Show Profile Send Shastaboat a Private Message  Reply with Quote
4831 is too slow for .243 Win size case. 4350 or H100V is about the slowest powder to use in that case and will produce the highest velocities and excellent accuracy with 100+ bullet weights.
Go to Top of Page

Zero333
Advanced Member



Canada
810 Posts

Posted - Jul 28 2017 :  17:07:10  Show Profile Send Zero333 a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Shastaboat

4831 is too slow for .243 Win size case. 4350 or H100V is about the slowest powder to use in that case and will produce the highest velocities and excellent accuracy with 100+ bullet weights.



Remember I seat the bullets out farther leaving more space in the boiler room. Most of the chambers I'm working with I'm seating 107 SMK and 105 vld's from 2.820" to 2.85".

I prefer working with 95% to 105% load density.
I use RL-25, Retumbo, H-1000 and H-4831 in my 243's. with 105-107's.
H-4831 and RL-25 have never disappointed me with their accuracy.
But H-4831 is my #1 go to 243win powder for 90gr-107gr because it's not as temp sensitive as RL-25. (for 90-100 grainers I use H-4831sc)

I'm not all about velocity either. I like accuracy and to some degree longer barrel life (with out having to wait for my barrels to cool all the time), which I get with H-4831 and H-1000.

I tried H-4350, RL-19 & RL-22 with 105-107 grainers.
H-4350 was good but didn't beat the accuracy of H-4831.
RL-19 could not achieve sub 0.75moa consistently.
RL-22 was good but EXTREMELY temp sensitive. It changed POI from cold barrel to hot barrel.



Treat that trigger like it’s your first date, not like you’ve been married to it for 20 years.
Go to Top of Page

Shastaboat
Advanced Member



USA
9124 Posts

Posted - Jul 28 2017 :  17:40:30  Show Profile Send Shastaboat a Private Message  Reply with Quote
So what velocity are you getting with 4831?
Go to Top of Page
Page: of 2 Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
Next Page
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
Jump To:
Reloader's Nest Forum © 2016 ReloadersNest Go To Top Of Page
This page was generated in 0.25 seconds. Powered By: Snitz Forums 2000 Version 3.4.06