Efficient load development

[AFG270]

I'd probably go to 58 and move cautiously past that if needed.

+1

I started getting pressure signs and 58g with a 100g E-Tips. My most accurate load was at 57.2g and 0.115" off the lands.

 

[SJB358]

I can't say it enough but jumping these monos and bonded bullets really seems to help a lot.

Sometimes they look like they have promise closer but I haven't been able to make them shrink till I really took them back. Really a different way of doing it than with standard bullets.

 

[bob_dobalina]

Well I need to get a plan b load going for my Sep. antelope hunt since I can't find any RL 26.

I have Retumbo, H4350, RL19, 110 ABs, and 100gr TTSXs.

Options I was thinking about -

100gr TTSX and RL19 or H4350.
110 ABs and RL19 or Retumbo.
115 Nosler Ballistic Tips and Retumbo.

I'd have to buy the 115 NBTs, but they are cheap. There's been a few recommendations for this load and I've read good things so I'm interested, but am concerned about game damage. I think I'll be under 3000fps at 100 yards though.

Any opinions?

 

[SJB358]

Well I need to get a plan b load going for my Sep. antelope hunt since I can't find any RL 26.

I have Retumbo, H4350, RL19, 110 ABs, and 100gr TTSXs.

Options I was thinking about -

100gr TTSX and RL19 or H4350.
110 ABs and RL19 or Retumbo.
115 Nosler Ballistic Tips and Retumbo.

I'd have to buy the 115 NBTs, but they are cheap. There's been a few recommendations for this load and I've read good things so I'm interested, but am concerned about game damage. I think I'll be under 3000fps at 100 yards though.

Any opinions?

If you put them in the ribs and stay off the legs I wouldn't worry about it. The 115 BTs aren't real explosive that I've seen. Any of the Bullets mentioned should be great.

 

[bob_dobalina]

Got some RL26! I see Alliant's recepies are a little more conservative, with a max of 55.6 and 56.6 for 100 gr speer and NBT respectively.

 

[6mm Remington]

IMR4350 worked well with 120 gr Partitions. I would feel your H4350 would work really well with the 100 gr bullets.

 

[SJB358]

Got some RL26! I see Alliant's recepies are a little more conservative, with a max of 55.6 and 56.6 for 100 gr speer and NBT respectively.

I don't doubt that, unless you are using their cases, bullet, rifles, primers to a "T" I'd expect a little bit of a difference.

 

[elkeater2]

Antelope and 115 BT's were made for each other! Heavier constructed bullets might just sickle right through.
EE2

 

[bob_dobalina]

I am ~ 3.166 for case overall length to be .100 of the lands. Barnes load data gives a COAL of 3.08 in their load data, which according to my measurements would put me .19 off the lands, does that seem odd?

I never feel real accurate with my Hornady OAL gauge. I did send my once fired brass off to make a modified case, but it seems if I don't jam the bullet into the lands firmly, my measurements are all over the place.

 

[Cleveland48]

I had similar issues today measuring the 129 gr SST. I ended up taking 12 measurements then averaging them. I came out at 2.260 to the lands with my hornady comparator. When I went to do my usual work up and seat the bullet .020" off the lands I was nowhere near magazine length. I ended up at .070" off the lands to function through my magazine. I still don't know if I screwed up the measurement or if the SST nose profile is that much different. So far all other hunting bullets I've tried I could kiss the lands from magazine length.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[bob_dobalina]

57.5 showed some promise but the velocities were lower than I was expecting. 57.5 was as far as I pushed it.

Using WW Brass, WLR primers, .10 off of lands.

 

[SJB358]

Bob, how did the QL correlate to the data you have gotten so far?

It looks like 57.5 is doing well. I don't have QL in front of me to check. If those are Accubonds I'd back them at least .050" off to capture speeds since that probably where you will be with accuracy.

 

[bob_dobalina]

Bob, how did the QL correlate to the data you have gotten so far?

It looks like 57.5 is doing well. I don't have QL in front of me to check. If those are Accubonds I'd back them at least .050" off to capture speeds since that probably where you will be with accuracy.

Scotty if I am reading it right, am slower, QL says I'd be at 3150 with ~55 grains which is where I'm at with 57.5. These are actually Barnes TTSXs not accubonds and I'm going off.of QL data posted earlier. I was hoping to be more like 3300.

I thought I'd seat them further out for more speed not back off? I was actually going to try 58gr

Thanks

 

[SJB358]

Bob, how did the QL correlate to the data you have gotten so far?

It looks like 57.5 is doing well. I don't have QL in front of me to check. If those are Accubonds I'd back them at least .050" off to capture speeds since that probably where you will be with accuracy.

Scotty if I am reading it right, am slower, QL says I'd be at 3150 with ~55 grains which is where I'm at with 57.5. These are actually Barnes TTSXs not accubonds and I'm going off.of QL data posted earlier. I was hoping to be more like 3300.

I thought I'd seat them further out for more speed not back off? I was actually going to try 58gr

Thanks

Bob, I wouldn't sweat the amount of powder you are using. I'd match up the speeds. Someone can adjust QL to match what you are seeing.

I'd also not worry about seating to gain speed. I'd rather shoot for accuracy. So I'd likely be at least .050".

And, yes, I'd keep pushing. With a 100 grain bullet you should easily top 3300, I'd start slowing down at the 3350 mark.

 

[bob_dobalina]

Thanks I'll try that.

I'm going off this QL data posted earlier in this thread. Maybe my results are so different because this suggests a case OAL of 3.25 and I'm at 3.166. Although you were getting some good numbers seated deep as well.

Cartridge : .25-06 Rem.
Bullet : .257, 100, Barnes 'TTSX'BT 30220
Useable Case Capaci: 60.237 grain H2O = 3.911 cm³
Cartridge O.A.L. L6: 3.250 inch = 82.55 mm
Barrel Length : 24.0 inch = 609.6 mm
Powder : Alliant Reloder-26

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   81    48.48   2723    1646   31289  11099     92.9    1.416
-18.0   83    49.69   2796    1736   33512  11450     94.3    1.380
-16.0   85    50.90   2870    1829   35918  11779     95.6    1.344
-14.0   87    52.12   2944    1925   38524  12082     96.8    1.308
-12.0   89    53.33   3019    2024   41349  12356     97.8    1.273
-10.0   91    54.54   3093    2125   44417  12598     98.6    1.239
-08.0   93    55.75   3168    2228   47748  12807     99.2    1.205
-06.0   95    56.96   3242    2333   51374  12979     99.7    1.172
-04.0   97    58.18   3315    2440   55324  13113     99.9    1.134
-02.0   99    59.39   3388    2549   59635  13206    100.0    1.096  ! Near Maximum !
+00.0  102    60.60   3460    2659   64348  13280    100.0    1.059  ! Near Maximum !
+02.0  104    61.81   3532    2770   69489  13348    100.0    1.024  !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+04.0  106    63.02   3603    2882   75054  13411    100.0    0.990  !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+06.0  108    64.24   3673    2996   81113  13468    100.0    0.957  !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+08.0  110    65.45   3743    3112   87728  13519    100.0    0.925  !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+10.0  112    66.66   3813    3229   94965  13564    100.0    0.894  !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 102 60.60 3617 2905 80671 12719 100.0 0.968 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Data for burning rate decreased by 10% relative to nominal value:
-Ba 102 60.60 3221 2303 50011 13549 97.2 1.177

 

[SJB358]

Looking quickly at that data and what you're getting they aren't too far apart. 26 has been much different in actual burn than what QL has on file.

I'd be just fine continuing to push in .5 grains up to where you're getting the velocity you are looking for.

 

[bob_dobalina]

Just had a chance to shoot 58 grains -

3197 - clean barrel
3259
3228
3267
3220

 

[SJB358]

Just had a chance to shoot 58 grains -

3197 - clean barrel
3259
3228
3267
3220

How's everything else look? If your gun is still easy lifting and no ther signs are showing themselves I continue creeping upward myself.

One caution is how accurate has your chrono been with other known combos? You're low on speed but I'd hate for it to be a chrono problem.

 

[bob_dobalina]

Just had a chance to shoot 58 grains -

3197 - clean barrel
3259
3228
3267
3220

How's everything else look? If your gun is still easy lifting and no ther signs are showing themselves I continue creeping upward myself.

One caution is how accurate has your chrono been with other known combos? You're low on speed but I'd hate for it to be a chrono problem.

I can't see any pressure signs on the case, and didn't notice a sticky bolt but should have paid attention better. I did notice the recoil was much more noticeable at 58 gr, but I was only wearing a t-shirt today, maybe that's why.

Group size was ok, but not really shooting for accuracy yet.

Good point on the chrono - I wish I had a second one to test against. It's just a cheap ProChrono.


I don't suppose anyone could run my setup through QuickLoad with a 3.168 seating depth? I'm just curious how it would line up with what I'm seeing. 24" barrel, RL26.

 

[Dwh7271]

Change your burn rate in QL.
I'm betting somewhere between .350 and .360 will do it. The .339 default is always off.