30-06 reload mystery


PDA






elktrout
December 8, 2008, 10:18 PM
I need your help to solve a mystery that has plaqued me for years. Here are the basics: Rem. 700 30-06 with 22 inch barrel. Rem and Win cases (neither seems to matter with my loads). Rem and CCI large rifle primers. IMR 4064, IMR 4350, H4350, IMR4831, and RL22.

My dilemma:

No matter what combination of components I use to match reloading manuals, I consistently get 200 or more fps less (chronographed) than any manual shows.

One exception: When I load W748 with a 150 grain bullet according to the load listed in the Hornady manual, I truly get the 3000 fps they show.

Any ideas why everything else is so slow? I have never tried it, but I am considering trying a magnum primer (with loads reduced and working up) to see if it is simply an incomplete burn issue.

Your suggestions would be appreciated. Thanks.

If you enjoyed reading about "30-06 reload mystery" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
1858rem
December 8, 2008, 10:30 PM
dont they use test barrels/chambers? its not always the same velocity from a universal receiver as from similar length to your barrel....also they may be testing from an
24" barrel?

Steve C
December 9, 2008, 02:50 AM
Some guns just shoot slow. Doesn't mean they're inaccurate or no good but try the same load in 3 different guns of the same barrel length and you'll generally get 3 different average velocities.

ArchAngelCD
December 9, 2008, 03:18 AM
That's not a problem at all. Hardly any velocities that are listed in manuals can be achieved by loaders like us. Like said above, they use special test barrels and long barrels in their tests. Use the data for comparing the components you are thinking about using, not as an accurate reflection of what you are going to get when you shoot.

dodge
December 9, 2008, 08:15 AM
I have a Savage that shoots 100 fps slower than what the manuals call for with my load. Every deer that I hit with this load can't tell you that it's going slower than the books call for. They're just dead. Some rifles are just sloer than others or they maybe faster you never know until you shoot them.

Mal H
December 9, 2008, 10:49 AM
In addition to rifles being different, chronographs can vary also. If you want to calibrate your chronograph, buy a box of high quality .22 lr where they state the expected velocity of the lot on the box (Federal 900B for example). Fire those out of a 24" bolt action or lever action .22 and you should achieve the stated velocity within 50 or so fps. The .22's usually vary less from the nominal velocity than most commercial centerfires or handloads.

ants
December 9, 2008, 12:05 PM
Some of the variables affecting measured velocity are environmental conditions, type of equipment (not just the chronograph, but the universal receiver and the copper crusher, strain gauge, or transducer attached to it), sample size, bullet, primer, case type, overall length, chamber dimensions, barrel length and rate of twist. Not to mention the precision to which the powder charge is measured.

It would be an absolute miracle if their lab conditions, chamber, barrel twist rate and so forth were the same as the day we shoot across our chronographs.

1858rem
December 9, 2008, 12:15 PM
maybe the jacket thickness and bearing surface of the bullet could be held accountable...... so what are some chronographs good to get started with?

NCsmitty
December 9, 2008, 01:03 PM
elktrout, the Win 748 is a fairly fast powder and will give you closer chrono numbers out of your 22" barrel because of more complete burning of the charge. The slower the powder, the more barrel length comes into play to give optimum performance. I'm pretty sure you know this. As several have reiterated, there are many factors involved with your question including the calibration of your chronograph.
The most important thing is to chose a reasonably good load that is the most consistent and accurate out of your rifle and not worry too much about peak velocity. Proper bullet selection for the game being hunted is more important.

NCsmitty

ants
December 9, 2008, 06:18 PM
I'm totally with Smitty. When my chrono was brand new, I measured the velocity of everything I could shoot over it. Now I don't take it to the range until after I have my best loads worked up. Then I use it to fine tune the best of the best.

elktrout
December 9, 2008, 09:42 PM
Thanks, everyone, for your input. I did believe, for some time, that the sporter rifle barrel difference to the universal receiver was the crux of the problem until I tried W748 and matched the manual.

Smitty,
I believe your input is likely additional food for thought regarding slow burning powders. I have a 7mm Wby Mark V with a 26inch barrel that absolutely smokes the chrono screens with the slowest burning powders on the market. But its long barrel is the key.

I may try some additional "somewhat faster" powders. Anyone have any suggestions on an optimum powder for 180 grainers?

Has anyone tried magnum primers instead of regular LR primers and seen any difference without getting into pressure problems?

NCsmitty
December 9, 2008, 10:16 PM
You know the drill for loading magnum primers with the starting with reduced loads. What you need to watch for is whether the velocity variations in shot to shot increases or decreases using Mag primers. Ball powders such as w748 usually do better with mag primers. Lower velocity variations will be the key to what is a good load. I think you know what I mean. I'll check some loads on Ammoguide and get back to you tomorrow. I'm beat and calling it a night.

NCsmitty

ants
December 9, 2008, 10:39 PM
Using plain old Speer HotCor 180g square base spitzer without cannelure (#2053) I tested 7 powders in one of my 30-06 rifles this year (Ruger 77 old model). IMR-4064 came out on top. It's burn rate is right in the middle for standard rifle powders.

Although IMR-4895 and H4895 are not the best in any of my rifles, they perform way better than average in all of them. Those two are not the same powder, but give me the same performance anyway. Go figure. Your experience may vary.

It's easy for me to work up a base load using either 4895 powder. As I work the load up in 0.3g increments, they get more and more accurate until the accuracy falls off suddenly (usually pretty close to max). These 4895 powders are easy for me to find a good load, which becomes my baseline for comparing other powders. Anything better is a good powder with real potential.

Smitty told you about magnum primers and I honestly can't add anything.
Except that they really didn't do much for my non-magnum rifles, so I stopped trying. You know every rifle is different, every shooter is different. You'll find out what works for you.

NCsmitty
December 10, 2008, 08:39 AM
I'll start out by saying to avoid W748 with 180gr bullets, because it's just too fast burning and pressure spikes happen real fast trying to get the bigger bullets moving.
Ants info is gold. IMO, IMR4064 and HVarget are probably the most versatile powders being made today. They are also nearly identical in burn rate. Their range of caliber use is amazing.
In most loads that are listed online and in manuals, IMR4350 or H4350 should get you the highest velocity under 180gr bullets. They are some of the powders you already have, however real life situations doesn't always follow the books. Rifles are individuals.
Hodgdon lists 48.7gr as Max for IMR4064 @2700fps for 180gr bullets.
Ammoguide shows 49.5gr but not Max @2670fps for 180gr out of a 23 in barrel.
I bet some of the older manuals show even different max loads.
If I would were you, I would revisit IMR4064 and see if you get a good shooting load.

NCsmitty

ranger335v
December 10, 2008, 11:58 AM
" I did believe, for some time, that the sporter rifle barrel difference to the universal receiver was the crux of the problem until I tried W748 and matched the manual."

All you proved with that is that your rifle matched THAT universal receiver's barrel. Still not a blanket reality. MOST of my rifles don't come very close to the manuals published speeds but a couple do. Just the way it is!

elktrout
December 10, 2008, 10:09 PM
Thanks everyone for your input. I will try your suggestions over the holidays (when I have some time off to shoot) and let you know how it turns out. Look for my reply no later than Jan. 3rd. I will reply to this existing thread.

I wish you happy holidays and good shooting.

ArchAngelCD
December 11, 2008, 01:05 AM
You said you want to try a somewhat "faster powder" with a 180gr bullet in the 30-06, I wouldn't do that. 4895 is the fastest powder I would use with a 180gr bullet. Like already said, with a 180gr bullet 4350 is probably your best choice but then again, Varget would be a bad choice either. I agree with NCsmitty's post about it being a very versatile powder.

I know someone who does a ton of testing and he swears the only powder he will use for the 30-06 is H414/W760. That's also hard to argue with.

dardascastbullets
December 16, 2008, 07:12 PM
Elktrout,

Your answer lies in the difference of the chronographs. I think that I can safely say that all firearm manufacturers use Oehler chronographs exclusively. You failed to mention the manufacturer of your chronograph. All chronographs are not created equal. Each manufacturer has their own unique circuitry which determines its precision and accuracy. Your chronograph (unless it is a lab grade Oehler) cannot be expected to produce the same results as the Oehler.

I may add that there are a multitude of variables that affect the chronograph's accuracy. It is very difficult to pinpoint the author's error without knowing the manufacturer of both chronographs in question, how he set his up (was it proper), were the batteries fresh, etc, etc, etc. I used a 35P for many, many years and there are several items that require attention to detail in order to reproduce accurate results.

Galil5.56
December 16, 2008, 08:29 PM
Really... 200 fps difference between most common (and inexpensive) chronographs and say an Oehler 35?... John Taffin's test says otherwise.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BTT/is_174_29/ai_n9480629/pg_3?tag=artBody;col1

Galil5.56
December 17, 2008, 08:27 AM
Because you edited you original post instead of posting a separate reply, and I can't know what you originally said, you seem to imply that only the Oehler can be accurate, assuming the others are not... I understand, and have read how various measuring frequencies (faster = more accurate) make for a superior product, and even *IF* this were the case absolutely, the results are awfully close, and who says the Oehler is the "most" correct?

Yes, a lot of variables come into play for any chrono's accuracy (steady light/enough light, muzzle location, temp, etc...) but to the OP's question, I think what you are seeing is perfectly normal, and duplicates my experience.

Using the exact same charge weight of WW760 from the same lot, same cases/primers/150 grain bullets fired over the same chronograph at almost the same time, my 22" barreled Rem 700 in 30/06 registers over 200 fps less than the Winchester made 1917 Enfield it was pitted against... WHY? Well, longer barrel, "faster" barrel, etc... This type of result has always guided me to use a propellant not much slower than IMR 4064 with 150 grain bullets if I expect to get the highest velocity for my 700, which also happens to be extremely accurate. Gotta love handloading to be able to tailor things the way you like, using a good chronograph to verify it.

ranger335v
December 17, 2008, 09:28 AM
"Your answer lies in the difference of the chronographs. I think that I can safely say that all firearm manufacturers use Oehler chronographs exclusively. You failed to mention the manufacturer of your chronograph. All chronographs are not created equal. Each manufacturer has their own unique circuitry which determines its precision and accuracy. Your chronograph (unless it is a lab grade Oehler) cannot be expected to produce the same results as the Oehler."

As a life long electrinics measurements tech in the space/defense programs, I question the validity of that observation. There are no "secrets" in the type clocks, trigger circuits or photo cells used to detect a bullets passage. It's all done with intergrated circuits these days and they really aren't very costly so the "best" components have pretty well left the others in the dust bin of the market.

The source of variations between instruments lies mainly in the clocks they use and that variation is pretty small, as a percentage of error and they all have it. High precision clocks still cost hundreds to make and thousands to maintain that high accuracy. No common maker of chronographs can afford that because we wouldn't pay for it. Nor do they need to, the variations in clock precision they allow are trivial when measuring velocities. But, none of them would, as a funciton of the design, have errors in the range of 200 fps.
More like 5 fps!

The variations we see in our reloads is due to the fact that our chambers are looser than the book makers so our charges produce less working pressure.

USSR
December 17, 2008, 09:38 AM
...the variations in clock precision they allow are trivial when measuring velocities. But, none of them would, as a funciton of the design, have errors in the range of 200 fps.
More like 5 fps!

+1.

Don

elktrout
December 27, 2008, 10:32 PM
Today, I tested reloads with IMR4350 and RL19 with both regular LR primers and also Fed 215 mag primers with 180 grain Hornady spire points. The best velocity obtained was around 2550fps. One load with each powder was a max load. They should be giving around 2700 or more. I am going to try IMR4064 next.

To answer your replies about my chronograph, it is a Shooting Crony. I do not confess to know much about chronographs, but it seems to me that if it was consistently low with 30-06 loads, it should be the same with other guns as well. It is not. I have used it to chronograph loads from my 7mm Wby mag and found them very close to published load data. So, I think I have a rifle and/or load problem.

What effect does throat erosion have on velocities? My loaded rounds are 3.335 inches long. The length from bolt face to contact with the rifling is 3.427 inches. My rounds fit fine in the magazine, but loading them longer would start to seriously reduce the depth in the necks. I have a lot of rounds through this rifle. It still is accurate, but I am beginning to believe it may have a throat problem.

The Bushmaster
December 27, 2008, 10:43 PM
O K Elktrout...Give this a try. I have loadings for a Browning A-bolt .30-06 with a 22" barrel that tip the scale at just under 2700 fps (2686 fps) using Hodgdon H4831SC. Lyman's 48th Edition lists this powders maximum charge at 60 grains (A compressed load). I load at 59 grains under a Sierra 180 grain BTSP. I would reduce this load (59 grains) by 5% and work up watching for over pressure signs. By The Way. My Browning is giving me 1 5/8" spread at 200 yards with this loading.

snuffy
December 28, 2008, 01:27 PM
There's more to a chronographs accuracy that the circuitry. Or the sky screens,(not the diffusers). The spacing of the screens HAS TO BE EXACT! My pact comes with a rail that the screens are mounted on. That is precision made to be exactly 24 inches between screens. If it isn't, it will have an induced error. It WILL be off the same each time, as long as the screens are solidly mounted,(tight).

I have an old Ruger M-77 in .280. I shot it for years, killed a slew of deer with it. I was loading it to book max. for 140 BT's. I never bothered to chrono it, until one day I had it set up and the rifle was also along on that range trip. WOW, it was almost 300 fps LESS that what the manual said it should be. I wondered why I had to add so much extra elevation to hit a 600 yd. target, now I know.

I asked my gunshop buddy, why that was. He said measure your throat/leede. Then said, don't bother. Bill Ruger was very afraid of lawsuits. He purposely made the throats on his rifle barrels very long, so they would not cause high pressure, blow up guns. I could NOT touch the rifling origin with a 140 grain bullet BARELY seated in a case! I could with a 175 round nose, seated in a case at one caliber,(.284)!

rcmodel
December 28, 2008, 01:38 PM
I was gonna say, Remington throats their barrels about halfway out to the muzzle!

Pressure-test barrels are always SAAMI spec throats.

The long Remington throat, and the missing 2" of barrel with the slower powders are very likely to account for the velocity difference.

rcmodel

elktrout
January 3, 2009, 10:11 AM
I shot some more loads through this rifle with IMR4064, including one that a half grain over max. Again, I got the same results as before: 200 fps below expectations. It is very consistent with low velocity spreads, but still pushing a 180 grainer at only 2500 with the top loads.

I also tried shooting a max load of IMR4064 and IMR4350 each with a 165 grain bullet and again was 200 fps below expected velocities posted in the manuals.

Here are some stats, in answer to the free bore replies:

A. Bolt face to rifling with 180 grain Hornady Spire Point is 3.422 inches.
B. Bolt face to rifling with 180 grain Nosler Partition is 3.471 inches.
C. Bolt face to rifling with 165 grain Nosler Partition is 3.471 inches.
D. All the 180 grain loads were shot with Hornadys and were 3.335 inches long.
E. All the 165 grain load were shot with Partitions and were 3.335 inches long.
F. The jump for the Hornadys would therefore be 0.097 inches to rifling.
G. The jump for the Noslers would therefore be 0.136 inches to rifling.
H. I would like to achieve approximately 2700fps for the 180 and 2800 for the 165, but all loads tested were 200fps below those numbers.

One additional point. I took my 7mm Wby mag along yesterday to shoot over the chronograph, just to be sure it was not the problem. My 175 grain loads at 3070fps were dead on. So, I don't think it is the chrony.

At this point, I am beginning to believe the gun needs a new barrel. This is the first rifle I ever owned, so it has sentimental value. It still feels like home when I pick it up and shoot it.

Any additional suggestions would be greatly appreciated. Thanks again for your replies. You have been very helpful. Anyone have suggestions for a good but reasonably priced barrel to consider?

Ridgerunner665
January 3, 2009, 10:30 AM
This is a 30-06 with a 22 inch barrel...you need powders slower than 4064 or RL 19.

Use Reloder 22 and seat the bullets longer (as long as the mag will allow)...that will be a compressed load with 165 grain bullets, but it will have some good speed.

Remington 700's have really long throats...so don't worry about jamming the bullets into the rifling...If they fit in the mag they won't be anywhere near the rifling.

Galil5.56
January 3, 2009, 11:36 AM
Here are some avg velocity numbers from a 22" Rem 700 in 30/06 using a Chrony F1 chronograph:

150 grain Sierra Game King:

58 gr H414 2820 fps

49.5 gr IMR 3031 2868 fps

59 gr H4350 2809 fps

180 grain Nosler SPBT

59 gr IMR 4831 2726 fps

This one pleasantly surprised me.

snuffy
January 3, 2009, 11:46 AM
This is a 30-06 with a 22 inch barrel...you need powders slower than 4064 or RL 19.


Actually it's just the opposite. Faster powders use less barrel length to burn completely. Slower powders need MORE BBL. length to burn completely. Using a slower burning powder in a short barrel, wastes powder. It either burns in the air in front of the barrel, or simple falls to the ground unburned.

The problem with using faster powders is excess chamber pressure. You can gain a little velocity in a shorter barrel, but you will run into pressure problems before you get where you want to go.

jpwilly
January 3, 2009, 01:19 PM
Barrels have a lot to do with this a good quality bbl with most likely solve your velocity issues.

NCsmitty
January 3, 2009, 04:01 PM
elktrout, probably the only way that you can verify your suspicions is to replace the barrel. Any of the good quality barrels such as Douglas, Shilen, etc. will work well. Most will match your contour to give you the same feel that you're used to with this rifle. I would think that you can find a local 'smith to do the work, seeing you live in Colorado.
You obviously have made an effort to solve the mystery, but it seems that you have a "slow" barrel. That happens sometimes for whatever reason.
I'm sure the deer or whatever doesn't care about the 200fps difference, but I know that it bothers you.
It's your choice to act on this or put it to bed.
Good luck!

NCsmitty

Ridgerunner665
January 3, 2009, 05:46 PM
Actually it's just the opposite. Faster powders use less barrel length to burn completely. Slower powders need MORE BBL. length to burn completely. Using a slower burning powder in a short barrel, wastes powder. It either burns in the air in front of the barrel, or simple falls to the ground unburned.

Thats true when the barrel is 14 inches...but it does not apply to barrels 20 inches or longer.

As long as the barrel is at least 20 inches...the same powders that give the best speed from a 24 inch barrel will give the best speed from a 20 inch barrel.

All that said...I agree with the rest of you...I think his barrel is wore out.

If you enjoyed reading about "30-06 reload mystery" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!