Ramshot TAC load data 223

RE: Chronograph

Just watch that you're within the expected velocity level for a given bullet using the powder as stated in the various manuals you can find. IE: look for a median velocity range average, if you're well above that range even for the higher bolt gun/5.56 NATO (62,350 psi) and using a bolt gun, you may need to back off the charge weight.

From what I'm reading on the Ramshot web site w/using TAC and taking the highest weight charge 26.4 (Sierra 50 gr. Blitz King) should be similar to the TNT both being a flat base bullet? Applying a 5% increase for the reduced pressure using a moly-coated bullet would bring you to 27.72 grains. But if you use the Speer data of 25.0 grains using TAC and their TNT bullet that puts you around 26.25 using the 5% increase. As you can see you're already at that level, on paper. The chronograph would confirm your research.

Speer doesn't list the psi for their load data, but from my experience it's on the safe side (just under 55,000 psi). With that said if you're using a bolt gun you could reasonably increase the charge weight 10-12% and still be within the 62,000 psi range? Note to self: *****Not all barrels using different components will produce the same results.**** Hence using a chronograph will alleviate a mistake by watching the velocity levels. As well as looking for the lowest S.D. and E.S. within the different powder charges should produce the best possible groups for you.

Whatever method you use if you notice the velocity over 3400 fps I'd say you're already at or very near max no matter what the primer/case head is telling you. My reasoning for this you're well beyond what you'll find in any reloading manual for a 50 gr. bullet in the .223 using TAC.

Besides, I've found that having an accurate load is almost never the fastest one. I'd also rather have that safety margin built in "just in case" the load that was developed during the winter didn't produce excessive pressure in either hot weather or while cooking in the chamber during extended fire? I've never put a lot of effort into pushing the envelope during load development. If I can put all three or five rounds into one ragged hole and it produces 1/2" MOA further out (300-600 yards), I'm perfectly happy with that!
 
Cole,

I cannot express strongly enough my appreciation for your comments. You have nailed it down, and express yourself better than pretty much anyone else I have encountered on the Internet. Kudos!

Like you, I am not seeking high velocity per se, but while working up this combination I continued to see low pressure indications (especially primer setback) and, using 0.2-grain increments, never saw a significant tightening of group size until I got up to 28.8 grains. If I had encountered a nicely flattened primer, not set back, and with any luck a smaller group size anywhere along the way, I would have gladly gone hunting with a lighter load. With powder being so hard to come by lately (where I live) and time being a more precious commodity, I am well past enjoying the novelty of the load development process itself. I seek to find an accurate load ASAP and use the powder and components for mass producing hunting rounds.

Obtaining a chronograph is now a priority. My steadfast shooting buddy here is shopping for one (he's on the hook for it - I built our shared shooting bench) so I need to light a fire under him now.

Brian
 
Brian,

I know your not the only one who has ever hand loaded ammunition without a chronograph, so don't feel bad, but honestly without one it's completely an unknown what is truly happening.

I used to race cars a lot back in the day. It's like making a modification on a car's engine, unless you've drag raced it before, you'll never know how fast or slower it actually is unless you have the time slips!

So without a known variant, assessing the data is limited to only is the group larger or smaller then the previous tests? Honestly for a short range weapon the velocity something is traveling at is really insignificant, but if you're shooting long range you'll need to know the actual velocity to figure out the bullet drop and dope to make first round hits.

Once you start using a chronograph you'll find less of a need to assess for heavy bolt lift, how the primer looks, etc. You'll focus on finding a load with low S.D. and E.S. with different powders and changing the powder charge after only 1 shot rather then many wasted ones as you move up to the expected velocity range. You'll use less ammo, and make better educated decisions on what's going that only a chronograph can tell you.

But back to your decision to use moly-coated bullets is entirely up to you? My own observations and from what other people much smarter then me on the subject have noticed through their own testing is it's just another compound that will need to be removed from the bore. I myself chalk it up as just another fad, but I'm hard pressed to jump on every new whizz bang theory. Call me old fashioned but if something works why change it?

Best of luck, and be sure to look through the bore and sight down through it so that's centered in the screens of your chronograph. That way you'll be less likely to hit it when the bullet passes thru the screens. Basically it is just like bore sitting a gun for a scope, works for me every time. Just make sure you keep the gun placed in the same spot and the target centered in the scopes reticle.
 
Cole,

Thanks once again. I will be back with more comments and questions.

I just noticed you are in N. Idaho. Whereabouts? I grew up in Lewiston, have a lot of kin up there still.

Brian
 
Brian,

I came across a statement made by Bore Tech for their Moly Magic bore cleaner, and it states " Bore Tech Moly Magic is designed to assist in the removal of molybdenum disulphide build-up in the rifle bore (moly). When exposed to high temperature and pressure, moly breaks down and causes a corrosive sulfuric acid byproduct which is very difficult to remove. This can significantly reduce accuracy and harm your barrel. Moly Magic is not a bore cleaner-it should be used in conjunction with a bore cleaner, such as Bore Tech Eliminator to achieve proper cleaning results."

I don't use Bore Tech's products but GA Precision swears by them and list the use of their products in their barrel break in procedure. But from that comment stated by Bore Tech about the use of moly-coated bullets I'd never use them in anyone of my guns...... just a thought I'd pass along.
 
Interesting, thanks. I have never had any fall-off in accuracy in my moly guns, but ok.

I do live in a dry climate. I wonder if that makes a difference? I never really "oil" my guns, yet never see any rust on them. I mention this because I have read elsewhere the effect you mention may be related to humidity in the bore.

Recently I pulled out a 700 custom 250 Ackley rifle I shoot only moly through, and shot some 100-grain Ballistic Tip loads I took an antelope with ten years ago, then put the loads away. They still group less than 1/2" at 100 yds, after shooting quite a few 87-grain moly TNTs through the gun in the intervening decade. Both loads still group as tight as ever.

Then there's a Sako Vixen in 222 that I have shot a lot of moly bullets through, and I got it out and tested some 40-grain V-max loads I assembled years ago - it still groups near 1/4 inch.

I never really "clean" the bores of these moly guns, I just occasionally push a few Shooter's Choice / Kroil-wetted patches through it, scrub a bit with a nylon brush, then push wet patches until all I see is a little grey moly, then a couple dry patches. This was the regimen the late Dan Hackett used in his benchrest competition guns.

I really don't know what else to say, except thank you for the comments, and I will be vigilant.

Brian
 
Cole,

Since you have been so generous with your advice, may I request a bit more? Suppose I want to revert to plain copper bullets. What is the bes and safest method for removing the moly and cleaning the bore back to "nekkid"?

Brian
 
brians356":bf0bapbm said:
PS and FWIW:

Here's what Brownell's publishes. In essence, they say removing the moly (and everything else) periodically is routine maintenance:

http://www.brownells.com/.aspx/lid=1069 ... aintenance

Brian
Click to expand...

I used both of those products and have for well over a decade with great success. I've also used Kroil and Shooters Choice #MC7 together for years as described by Fred Sinclair. Walt Berger of Berger Bullets used to use Kroil and USP Bore Paste on his barrels with moly-coated bullets.

Either USP Bore Paste, J-B Bore Cleaner or Iosso Bore Cleaner on a patch short stroked (3"-4") for 5-6 times and progressively advance the patch through the bore until the patch exits the barrel. Push a wet patch of solvent before and after this treatment. Kroil does a good job of removing the fouling if left in the bore overnight.

Honestly I'd use non-coated bullets only because of the stated issues I've seen first hand, but that's interiorly up to you Brian.

From what I'm still reading you'll still need to do a sufficient cleaning to remove the moly, carbon and copper so that it does not layer up. this is somewhat contradictory to the promised benefits of less cleaning. You might clean less frequently, but when you clean you'll still need to remove the build-up of the different fouling materials in the barrel.

Good luck and Keep'em in the Ten Ring.
 
Last night I got out my R-700 custom in 250 A.I. which has only ever seen moly bullets. It has a BlackStar 17-4 stainless (i.e. tough!) barrel with the bore electro-chemically polished using their proprietary process. So this particular barrel is probably an outlier when discussing moly build-up and cleaning, as it will be particularly resistant to corrosion and very smooth.

This rifle has not been cleaned for some time, probably 50 -75 rounds fired since cleaning. I ran in a few very wet patches (Shooter's Choice and Kroil) wrapped on a Parker-Hale jag, pushed out some black carbon fouling. After about three patches, they came out the color of the cleaning fluid with a little grey (I assume from the moly.)

Then I ran another very wet patch into it, and let it soak for a couple of hours. No brushing. Finally I pushed dry patches though until they came out dry with just a bit of grey (again, I believe from the moly.) There was no hint of blue which with a long soak in Shooter's Choice will reveal some copper fouling.

I don't have a bore scope, so I cannot inspect it properly, but I have no reticence about putting more moly bullets through it (I have a fair number of reloads assembled for it.) I can see a bit of the bore at the muzzle, and it looks fine, for what that's worth (probably not much.)

Unless and until I see either a drop-off in accuracy (never have), or have difficulty cleaning it, or feel any tight spots ("rings"?) in the bore, I will not worry about it.

However, I may completely clean my Rem 700 VS (223) and revert to plain copper, since that rifle had many hundreds of plain bullets through it until I very recently switched to moly (as described earlier in this thread.)

I also have a Sako Vixen in 222 which has been seeing only moly bullets since I owned it, and shoots tiny groups. I will have to clean it and think about it as well.

Brian
 
FWIW, I just found an old thread on a the "longrangehunting.com" forum where a chap said he had over 2000 rounds of 22-250 A.I. through a BlackStar barrel, all moly bullets, claimed accuracy "in the .3s" and had never seen a drop-off in accuracy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

P
223 Loads Have Me Worried
Replies
10
Views
1K
RiverRider
RiverRider
S
"Interchangeability" of load data question - DrMike
Replies
7
Views
2K
sithlord6512
S
AMMUNITIONAmmunition BULLETSBullets BRASSBrass FirearmsFirearms GearGear
Back
Top