Reloading and chasing accuracy.

[ShadeTree]

Addicting. Can be very frustrating but also immensely rewarding. I have a little model 7 that has always been a decent shooter but slowly was starting to struggle with accuracy and then fell completely off the wagon. 2 to 3" groups became the norm even with loads that had previously usually shot just under or just over MOA. And they weren't consistent groups. Flier's, strings, oval's, you name it.

After one by one addressing a couple of mechanical issues I thought I had found that might be either a major problem or at least a hindrance, I went to the range with a near max load that had previously been a good load, and after 2 fouling shots on a clean barrel it proceeded to print out its best ever group at 100yds measuring less than 3/8 of an inch and has been a performer ever since as long as the nut behind the trigger does his job. More fun than a barrel of monkey's when it all comes together.

 

[DrMike]

More fun than a barrel of monkey's when it all comes together.

Ain't that the truth! Col. Whelen was correct in opining that accurate rifles were interesting rifles. I'm going through all my rifles one final time to get at least one superb load before I begin selling off a number of them. It should be a winter of fun.

 

[Guy Miner]

It is a fun pursuit - and I admit that I usually stop load development whenever I reach what I see as "reasonable" accuracy & velocity results for a given rifle or handgun.

With the SWAT rifle and the varmint rifle, that was half MOA. With most of my general purpose hunting rifles, I'm very happy with MOA.

The .375 H&H surprised me when I started working with it, and found it capable of breaking the MOA barrier quite easily.

Guy

 

[Elkman]

As I have pointed out here before I hate any kind of load development. BUT, it is necessary. At this time in my life I have several rifles that I have not shot in a while but of the 4, I use consistently two are MOA rifles, and two are consistent 1/2" or better rifles. I posted recently that in my annual point of aim check, for my 300 WM, I shot a 1.89 three shot group followed by a 1.008 group at 300 yards, my .308 tactical does similar. My 223 and Mashburn are both MOA rifles. I will tinker with both a bit before I fly south with the geese for the winter. I also have a new loading for my tactical, as match bullets seem to slide through Coyotes, without doing a lot of damage. 150 gr Sierra's will hopefully open up a little better.

 

[ShadeTree]

It is a fun pursuit - and I admit that I usually stop load development whenever I reach what I see as "reasonable" accuracy & velocity results for a given rifle or handgun.

With the SWAT rifle and the varmint rifle, that was half MOA. With most of my general purpose hunting rifles, I'm very happy with MOA.

The .375 H&H surprised me when I started working with it, and found it capable of breaking the MOA barrier quite easily.

Guy

Same here Guy. Out of a typical factory sporter weight rifle if a fella can find more than 1 bullet weight in that rifle that will hold right at an inch at 100, my feeling is they have a pretty good gun and a couple of pretty good loads. 2-3" with reloads is unacceptable in my book though, especially when that gun shot a lot better than that before. It took quite a bit of work on my part to figure out what all was going on, but I'm more than happy with the results and learned some things I would've otherwise never delved into.

I have a model 70 in an -06 that will shoot 1/2" in more than 1 bullet weight if I do my part. I used to hate it because it kicked like a backyard mule, but a limbsaver pad took care of that and now I love it. Bone stock rifle other than some trigger work I done on it and as long as it keeps that kind of shooting up I'm gonna leave my "wonder what this would do" itchy fingers off of it. :mrgreen:

 

[PJGunner]

Sometimes the fun can be the challenge of making a lousy shooting rifle into a good one.

One such rifle I have is a Ruger M77 RSI, the one with the full length stock. It is chambered to the .308 Win., normally an easy round to find and accurate load, right? Not this one. I'd been looking for one at a decent price for sometime and one showed up in the paper at a ridiculously low price so I gave the guy a call. The rifle was cherry and even had a decent scope on it. I had to ask, "Why are you selling it at such a low price.?" His words, "Because it's inaccurate as hell. It won't groups with any weight bullet." Well, at least the dude was honest so I bought it.

I started out trying all the standard recommended loads and he was right. At best three to three and a half in groups and sometime four inches would be what I got.

Now unlike some people, I'm a bit more realistic when working up loads for a stubborn rifle. I figure, if I can get it to shoot something at least in the 1.5" range, I'll be happy. Maybe not the best but I can at least hunt it. :roll: So conventional recommended powders and bullets didn't work. Time to go unconventional starting with powders.

Long story short after two years messing with that rifle I finally found a load that would do 1.5" on a consistant basis. I won't give the charge but the powder was W760 and the Speer 165 gr. Hot Core. Substitute any other 165 gr. bullet and accuracy right back straight to hell. :?: :?: :?:

Found two more of those rifles that sold cheap for exactly the same reason as the first. Tried the non-conventional load and both rifles did the 1.5" limit. Still haven't figured all this out and I got that first rifle about 15 or so years ago.

One day while giving them their annual wipe down, I looked at the metal muzzle cap and wondered what would happen if I relieved them where they touched the barrel. Took them to the range and now they group right at 1.25" average.

I've taken more than a few deer with them from roughly 30 feet to 250 yards. Bullet speed is not all that great at 2550 FPS but it worked on the 250 yard deer so no complaints. FWIW, that same load does 2610 FPS from a 22" M70. The RSI's barrel is 18.5". I wonder how well that 2550 FPS load might work on say a 250 yard shot on a cow elk?

Paul B.

 

[BretN]

Those RSI's are nice guns, but I always wondered how they'd shoot. I would imagine that 165 hotcor load would do well on a cow elk. The gun would sure be handy in timber and easy to carry.

My most frustrating gun to load for was my first, M70 featherweight 280 Rem. Those pencil barrels can be tricky to load for and shoot, but I have finally settled on a very consistent AccuBond load in RL19. Very satisfying to finally get there. That load is barely above a starting load, but rock steady now in that gun, which tends to show pressure signs before some book max loads.

Learning from that gun, I have settled on other "slow", but very accurate loads in some of my other guns. A long shot for me would be 85-100 yards in the woods we hunt, but most shots are 50 yards or less. Given those facts, I really don't need to try and wring out every last fps. I "settle" on the slower more accurate load most of the time, usually very happy with anything under an inch. Then load a bunch of those and go shoot them.

 

[ShadeTree]

BretN, the thin barrel is one of the tricky issues I ran into with the 18" barreled Model 7 I have. All guns are a little different to a degree, but like you other than finding an oddball combo that worked decent, I used to find the best loads usually were at or just above starting loads for a lot of bullets with several different powders.

Groups would really start opening up as I went up in charge weights with most bullets and I assumed it was "too hot" for that gun. 1 of the mechanical issues I took care of was to bed the action. That wasn't all I done, but as it relates to powder charges what I found now is it typically likes loads a full 1.5-2 grains hotter with the same bullets than it did before and it shoots better than it did before. So what I thought was a too hot issue with a light weight barrel was really a bedding issue compounding the problems with a more tricky light weight barrel. Your results may vary.

 

[Guy Miner]

With such a lightweight barrel, is there any point to possibly bedding the full length of the barrel?

I know that has been sometimes done in the past, but i have no personal knowledge of how well it would work. NULA builds lightweight rifles, and it appears that they bed the entire length of the barrel channel:

http://www.newultralight.com/

Guy

 

[6mm Remington]

Guy back in 1972 before I hunted with the Remington Model 600 in 6mm Remington that my dad had purchased and gave to me he had a gunsmith friend of his glass bed the rifle and adjust the trigger. When he bedded the barrel and action he did it the full length of the stock. It has always shot very well and if there have been any points of impact changes I have not noticed them. I'm not sure if that helps or not to answer the question, but she is a shooter.

 

[ShadeTree]

With such a lightweight barrel, is there any point to possibly bedding the full length of the barrel?

I know that has been sometimes done in the past, but i have no personal knowledge of how well it would work. NULA builds lightweight rifles, and it appears that they bed the entire length of the barrel channel:

http://www.newultralight.com/

Guy

Guy I just done a front and rear bedding job with 1 change maybe from what is typical. I used the actual action screws and along with bedding the recoil lug and chamber section of the barrel, I left the bedding fully migrate into the front action screw hole. The front action screw now threads up through solid bedding on its way to threading into the action, essentially becoming a pillar bedding right behind the recoil lug. The rear action screw hole was drilled out in the stock after bedding it to ensure the rear action screw has plenty of clearance so it can't bind up. Right way to do it?? No idea but it worked in this gun.

1 thing that I kind of did wrong that I can't take back now, is that immediately after the bedding job was complete I free floated the barrel. If I had it to do over again I would've tested it first with a bedding job and the factory pressure point up front. The gun really shoots but seems fussy about how its arranged up front on a solid front rest. It likes to be supported well rearward on the forearm.

 

[BretN]

I fixed mine by getting a Bell and Carlson Medalist stock a few years ago. It's fully free floated, and is now consistent with loads it likes. I bedded the lug only on it. Not as pretty as the walnut featherweight, but much easier to shoot well i think. The featherweight stock always had some pressure from the left side, and the stock is so thin i never wanted to try and sand it out.

I have a 140 gr AccuBond load that shoots right around 1/2" and a 140 Sierra PH load that is just under or around an inch at 100 yards. Working on a 160 gr load too. Mine often starts showing pressure at or before book max, so I've just stopped trying to push that gun as it's not worth it to me.