264 w/140g AMAX results

[remingtonman_25_06]

Well, ended up buying a box of the 140s because I can buy them locally. I got some QL info from POP and loaded up 3 loads each with Retumbo and H1000. QL was calling for 72.6g as MAX with Retumbo for velocity of 3150fps, not to shabby from the 24" bbl I was thinking. 69.5g was MAX for H1000 at 3108fps. With Retumbo I loaded 3 each at 69.5, 70.5, 71.5, and H1000 at 66.5, 67.5, 68.5., Neck down R-P 7mm RM case, Fed 215, 3.315" right at the lands, still fits in the mag box, lucky me, short throated! I cleaned the barrel prior to shooting for groups with the 140 amax. I sent 3 of my 95g vmax downrange to foul her up a bit, these 3 made a .52" group, very surprising giving a clean/cold barrel shot was part of that group. That barrel break in mighta paid off, cleans up pretty easy for a factory barrel and is not shooting to bad, for a winchester anyways... :lol: I decided to try Retumbo first and shoot the 69.5g load. First shot read 3244fps over the cronograph and I got some pressure signs on the primer, no sticky bolt lift or other signs of pressure so I shot the next 2, they read 3197fps and 3174fps. It shot horrible, 5"+ group at 100 yards. I didn't know if it was because it was definately a hotter load, or if they weren't completley stabilizing. To get a 5" group at 100 yards for me is just astonishing with a match grade bullet. So I walk up to the target, nice round holes, dont think twist is the problem. It was running 50-60fps faster then what QL predicted as well for a MAX velocity, although I was 3g under there predicted MAX. I decided to stop there and not shoot the 70.5 and 71.5g loads. Not to happy at this point in time. So I get the H1000 loads out. I only shot the 66.5 and 67.5g load, didn't need to go any further as you can see. 66.5g load did a .99" at 3093,3058,3044fps. 67.5 did a .46" at 3108,3115,3129 Further testing will be in order to prove the 67.5g load, but its not a bad start. What I was hoping for was 1/2 MOA and 3000fps with the 24" bbl, but I got 3100 out of her instead, so I'm a pretty happy camper right now.

Rifle is an early 80s Win model 70 XTR in .264 Win Mag, 24" bbl. Scope is a Leupold VX3, 6.5-20x50LR, 30mm tube, SF, Fine duplex, warne base, leupold rings. I did the trigger down to around 1.5#, it has not been bedded or floated, completely bone stock minus the trigger job.

 

[FOTIS]

Not too shabby Remmy! That is pretty good for ath 24" tube.

BTW what a stock!

 

[1Shot]

According to Hodgdon Powder Company load data for the 264 win mag you are WAAAAAAY over max loads with all your loads.
Max load for 140 gr bullets with Retumbo is 63.5 grs and max load with H-1000 is 58.5 grs. The reason that you are getting such high velocity with the H-1000 and 140's is your pressure is way up there. I would be willing to bet that if you tried to shoot that load in the summer temps it would lock your bolt up. I shoot the 130 AccuBond with 66.5 grs Retumbo which is a max load for my rifle in 70 to 80* temps. 67 grs left ejector marks on the case. With the 130 AB and 66.5 gr Retumbo I get 3350 fps out of my 27 3/4" Shilen barrel. 140 A-max is a very accurate bullet but if you are planing on shooting deer size and up game I would switch to a different bullet unless all your shots will be over 300 yards. That bullet has a very thin jacket and at close range at over 3000 fps it really comes apart on impact. It will work fine on thin skin deer at long range where it has slowed down.

 

[Songdog]

According to Hodgdon Powder Company load data for the 264 win mag you are WAAAAAAY over max loads with all your loads.
Max load for 140 gr bullets with Retumbo is 63.5 grs and max load with H-1000 is 58.5 grs. The reason that you are getting such high velocity with the H-1000 and 140's is your pressure is way up there. I would be willing to bet that if you tried to shoot that load in the summer temps it would lock your bolt up. I shoot the 130 AccuBond with 66.5 grs Retumbo which is a max load for my rifle in 70 to 80* temps. 67 grs left ejector marks on the case. With the 130 AB and 66.5 gr Retumbo I get 3350 fps out of my 27 3/4" Shilen barrel. 140 A-max is a very accurate bullet but if you are planing on shooting deer size and up game I would switch to a different bullet unless all your shots will be over 300 yards. That bullet has a very thin jacket and at close range at over 3000 fps it really comes apart on impact. It will work fine on thin skin deer at long range where it has slowed down.

I trust Quick Load "WAAAAAAAAY" more than any load manual... it has never steered my wrong. Velocities are typically very close, and pressures seem right in line..."book" loads seem very hit and miss... there's a reason that none of them concur on any load data.

 

[OldMan]

I have seen quickload data that would pop primers on some rifles and have seen others take way more without strain. Unless one has a strain guage system to test pressure you can be playing with fire. I have worked up loads by miking new brass, then firing the load and miking again. This has worked well for me in the past in a 300 Wby with RL22 before any data was in print. When the nosler book came out for this powder I was at the same charge and velocity they listed. I witnessed the aftermath of a 340 weatherby blowup some years ago and it got me to thinking! It was a model 70 that broke one lug of the bolt from too many "SAFE" loads. The lugs on a bolt flex with every shot and flex a lot with high pressure loads. Take a piece of metal and bend it back and forth lots of times and it will eventually break. BE SAFE!

 

[DrMike]

I use QuickLoad, and I obviously like the program. However, the opening dialogue cautions:

"Ballistic programs such as QuickLOAD cannot predict EXACT internal ballistic results. Therefore one CANNOT use this software as a substitute for information gleaned from a reloading manual along with standard handload development and practices. QuickLOAD is designed and intended only for use by those persons who are completely familiar with all safe handloading practices. It is mandatory to verify any computer-generated results with data found in current manuals. NEVER use charges exceeding recommended maximum charges or reduce charges below recommended minimum [start] charges as representing in such modern manuals."

Anyone using QuickLOAD data must assume responsibility to ensure that the load is worked up in a safe manner for the rifle in which the load will be shot.

Again, there are a variety of factors that cannot be predicted, including but not limited to lot-to-lot variation in powder burn rates, differences in primer burn rates (QuickLOAD "assumes use of the mildest primer that will do the job in the specified load"), differences in tolerance in barrel manufacturing, differences in tolerance in chamber reamers used and even differences in bearing surface in different lots of bullets manufactured by the same manufacturer. Each of these will ensure changes in results.

Ultimately, everything else being equal, higher velocity means a higher chamber pressure. Even the newer powders becoming available must depend upon pressure to generate the velocities, though they are engineered to create a sustained pressure over an extended period in order to generate a higher velocity, must be held to maximum peak pressures to ensure safety.

 

[JD338]

Remmy,

Looks like a shooter to me.

JD338

 

[remingtonman_25_06]

Yah I noticed that on the Hodgon site...I also notice that about everywhere you look for 264 data, its pretty widespread...I looked at a few manuals, searched the net, as well as QL info, so I did some research and cross reference. I admit the Retumbo is waaaay hot, might not hurt to start a bit lower next time.

I also trust QL more then a manual. They are both used as guides only, my rifle with my components will tell me when I've hit MAX. Rememeber, every tom, dicK, and harry uses a loading manual so they arey conservative, otherwise our bullet companies wouldn't be in business to long with all the lawsuits from idiots out there. According to QL, I'm right in there where I should be velocity and pressure wise with H1000. 69.5g at 3108 was there projected numbers, I am using 2g less powder at 67.5g for the same velocity, so I think I'm doing ok.

It is definately an upper end load in my rifle, not saying it isn't by any means, but it is not showing any visible signs of overly high pressures. No ejector marks, no gas marks or leakage around the primer, no sticky bolt lift, no pierced primers, etc.

I"ll keep an eye on her for sure, but the way its looking, I think shes gonna be good to go.

I know the AMAX is a very frangible bullet, thats why I like them, for how and where I hunt, they are perfect. I rarely get a shot at a deer inside 300 yards, so I dont think I"m gonna have to much to worry about.

 

[remingtonman_25_06]

This got me thinking, someone please explain this because I cant figure it out.

264 is an overbore magnum, correct? Yes I think so anyways. So with that said, for highest velocity with heavy for caliber bullets, say the 140g bullets, why is it that in the Hornady manual or any manual period they only list H1000 as being able to push the 140g to a measley 2800fps?? You look at the slow burning powders and most of them are 100-200fps less in velocity then your medium burning powders like 4350 and 4831.

Anyways, I just think thats a bit retarded because when you get the QL program out, its the exact opposite. The slow burning powders are producing the most velocity while the faster burning powders are not. I thought thats what slow powders were for? To get the most out of your cartridge?

Get what I'm saying here???

 

[FOTIS]

Some manuals will be 100-200 fps less (at their "max") than others.

One company when I asked replied, "That is not the max, that is where we stopped testing. Thus we can not recommend anything past that"

Interesting statement.

Quickload is only a reference. When it says 70 gr of IMR XXXX I always start at 63 gr or 10&% less. If in a hurry I make up 1 or two rounds to see where my velocity "peaks" and then get to work for group.
For example if I were shooting a 264 with the 140 I would shoot at the start of the loads and when I reached 3000 fps then I know I am almost there.

 

[DrMike]

I wish every hand loader would accept responsibility for their own practise in handloading. Unfortunately, we live in a litigious age, and many people do not want to be responsible when things go south. Because every rifle is unique, it is quite likely true that for many of them, loads can be charged with significantly higher charges while generating pressures that meet SAAMI standards. Unfortunately, it is impossible to guarantee that every rifle will permit "tickling the dragon's tail." Fotis has outlined a safe and conservative approach--start ten percent below predicted maximum charges and work up.

I would suppose that each of us know people who see a maximum charge and simply choose to throw that charge. Or, we know people who develop a load for one bullet and assume that because another bullet has the same weight they can use that same charge without verifying the safety. Even picking a midrange load is no guarantee that excessive pressures will not be generated. Pressure curves can spike unpredictably and pressure rises exponentially as charge approaches and exceeds the maximum. A one percent increase in charge weight does not necessarily translate into a one percent increase in velocity; often, it can be a much greater increase in velocity.

I have had technicians employed by bullet manufacturers guide me in building loads that exceeded listed maximum charges. They did so on the basis of building a load for the rifle and not building a uniform load that met the book. Such efforts always assume knowledge of signs of pressure and a willingness to back off when those signs appear. They also assume willingness for the handloader to accept responsibility when things go wrong. I'm not terribly concerned about those on this forum who are conversant with pressure signs and who are quite willing to accept responsibility for their actions. I've read enough communications for many of you fellows to know that you have more than a cursory knowledge of an exciting hobby and sport. I have learned a lot from many of you and have nothing but great respect for your observations and the data generated. I am, however, concerned for those who may be lurking on the boards, assuming that what is published is gospel or for those who are unfamiliar with pressure signs and lurch unsuspectingly into trouble.

Remmy,

Your observation is correct. Know that with a once-fired case, the user of QuickLOAD can measure the case volume which adjusts the pressure accordingly. Almost always, because of variation in chamber tolerance, I get higher charges because I have more volume in my case. Also, by setting the maximum peak pressure, QuickLOAD permits adjusting the charge. The downside of this practise is that lot-to-lot variations can throw a curve. This is the reason for the caution to work up each time you change components. The projections don't change, but the data you generate with your rifle certainly can change.

 

[SJB358]

Remmy! Glad to see you toting a Winchester M70 finally! We all knew you would come around! Its kind of ironic, I jumped into a M700 25-06 and you have jumped to the M70 264! Here I thought you were a died in wool Remington man!

Great shooting and awesome looking rifle. Looks like your Edge might have a little long range competition now! That 264WM is a barn burner and it looks like you have found its load! Scotty

 

[nodak7mm]

One must remember, All published data, whether put out by pwdr mfg or bullet mfg or found on the internet; Its all just a reference point to base your starting load on...


The following is reloading gospel!!!

Fotis has outlined a safe and conservative approach--start ten percent below predicted maximum charges and work up.

 

[Ol` Joe]

QL is not a substitute for pressure tested load book data. In the 06/2004 issue of Handloader, John Barsness reports finding QL predictions of pressure for a given charge can be off 10 ksi, when fired in a piezo set up. I find QL does do a superb job of estimating cartridge potential, and it does do a very good job of selecting which class (or "speed") of powders to use to obtain that potential. However, it is not accurate enough to distinguish between two similar powders from different makers, and of course it can't know about all the possible lot variations. It also is clueless about primer effects, which in extreme circumstances can double pressures.

From this web site http://kwk.us/ibsw.html

Pressure averages from QL are very close to what your rifle will produce on average but, there are swings in pressures and the pressures reported in manuals, web sites and QL are only "averages". There is a higher and lower component to the pressures reported.
The books all report just what they found in the lab. No one wants to say their bullet or powder won`t do as well as the next guys. The difference they report in their manuals are due to variation in components and were true at the time of testing. The labs may have found that the data showed a max pressure reading of say 69K psi and a low of 62K psi with a average psi of 65K (MAP). Since the SAAMI MAP for that cartridge is 65K with a MPLM of 68K psi they will drop the charge until the MPLM falls below the 68K allowed even though the MAP is now only 63KPSI. That set of components in the lab at that time could not produce a "safe" load at 65K psi.
QL doesn`t take MPLM this into account as it can only predict the average max pressure. As the others say, if you are getting higher velocity then the various manuals report with the components you are using, you are probably over the pressures they had too. JMHO..........

 

[OldMan]

If you want some loads from a manual that would scare you, look at the 1970 or earlier Speer. They do show over 3300 fps with the 140 grain bullet. This is with older powders and probably not nearly as accurate of a method to test pressure. They tested factory loads in this book also with the 7mm Rem Mag factory loads doing 3030 fps with the 175 grainer.
If I hadn't seen the blown up gun I'd probably still be hot rodding my loads. I would still trust the head expansion method though.

 

[mcseal2]

I e-mailed Berger when I built my 264 and had them send me their load data. Their max loads for the 140gr VLD is right where you ended up with the H1000. With the Retumbo your starting load is a grain over their max.