Fairly new to reloading. I started with .223 just to get the hang of it and every round I loaded went bang which was amazing and gave me the confidence to now build rounds for my bolt action. I started putting information together to determine case length, shoulder bump, powder charge, etc. My question is, am I going way to deep and over analyzing everything or is this the right direction; and if so, anything I am missing?
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
6.5CM Development guidance
- Thread starter Locapitano
- Start date
The search feature is your friend
www.snipershide.com
6.5 Creedmoor
I'm in the process of building my 6.5 Creedmoor and I have a few boxes of their 120gr AMAX factory loads, but once those are gone it to the table. I've seen a few loads on here, but they are spread out all over the place. Figured we need a spot for all of them to go. Bullets I'm interested in...
www.snipershide.com
Last edited:
You need to gather the bare minimum of information to be a competent reloader so yes, you do need to do it and no it’s not the deep end.
If you don’t you’re just a retard making a lil bomb.
There was an image to show my work that did not get uploaded. Wanted feedback on what I’ve put together so far. Sorry without the image it seemed like a very open ended request.
Attachments
OH, boy. All of the info you are seeking has its place so you aren't looking at the wrong information but you may be overanalyzing and may run the risk of going down the rabbit hole chasing things that don't make much of a difference. For instance you may see information on shoulder bump being best at 0.002" versus 0.003". The reality is either will work but you can get lost trying to find the correct one. What ultimately matter is not which one is best but being consistent in what you do. Seating depth/distance to the lands is another one you can get lost in based on what other people post. Not all chambers are the same and what works for one may be impossible in another. You might want to learn about differences in chamber freebore and how it affects seating depth.
The good news is you have gained some experience with 223 reloading so the next step is to learn the nuances of going from just reloading to developing precision ammunition. I will say if you are interested in getting into the real details you can get Jeff Siewert's book "Ammunition Demystified".
Curious...where did you get the distance to lands data from....measure it on your own chamber? "Reference data" from??
Work up for safety, but if your 6.5 doesn’t shoot with a 140 ELDM at 2.800” COAL with 41.5 grains of H4350, something is wrong with it
Measured my own rifle using the lock N load tool. Measured with all three projectiles since they have different profiles. Figured start off with .002 off the lands and then I can work on seating depth once I have one or two charges with solid ES
I’m getting sub-MOA with freedom munitions 140gr. She’s a solid girl.
I started compiling equipment and components over 2 years ago where H4350 was a mythical unicorn which is why I have staball and superformance on hand.
.002" off lands??!! That's basically jammed. That seems to me to be pretty dang close for the bullets you are evaluating.
And you may not find that low ES load that works being that close. Now, I'm not one of the reloading experts on here so others may well disagree with me.
But hey, the journey is part of the fun. Best of luck...cheers
I’m here for advice and in no way saying I know exactly what I’m doing… what do you suggest?
Trying to get consistent seating depth 0.002" off the lands is probably going to be an issue. Things are very sensitive at that point and the velocities are probably going to be inconsistent. You would be better off jamming OR backing off to 0.010". BUT you need to back off on those loads which are based on jumping in either case.
lol yeah about 1/4 of those ELDMs will end up @ jam
Sorry responses are very slow since I’m still being moderated and have not figured out how to get verified or how to no longer be moderated. (Number of responses possibly?)
Either way, should I go to .01 off the lands like Baron suggested or go to SAAMI specs of 2.825 for all projectiles?
I appreciate the criticism here, I’m trying to not screw up my results or my rifle. Thanks guys. Keep them coming.
Follow up question. Am I wrong but the seating stem in the seating die is pushing down the projectile on the ogive, while the projectiles vary in length (I’ve measured up to .004 in variance) if the .002 off the lands is based on CBTO and no COAL, wouldn’t it mean that all rounds would vary in COAL but be off the lands exactly .002?
I was really making a joke about Hornady’s consistency. One of the guys I shoot with told me “never, ever measure a Hornady bullet… just load them and go shoot.”
I’ve achieved excellent accuracy with the 143 ELD-X @ 0.005” jump, but I don’t shoot either of those Hornady bullets you listed. I’d give 0.005” a try, then work out in 0.010” increments, then retest around the smallest group. You’ll get some different opinions about how to go about this.
Don’t let our cautions keep you from trying stuff, as long as you’re safe. Learning load development is the largest part of handloading.
I’ve achieved excellent accuracy with the 143 ELD-X @ 0.005” jump, but I don’t shoot either of those Hornady bullets you listed. I’d give 0.005” a try, then work out in 0.010” increments, then retest around the smallest group. You’ll get some different opinions about how to go about this.
Don’t let our cautions keep you from trying stuff, as long as you’re safe. Learning load development is the largest part of handloading.
The ogive is technically the entire curved portion of the bullet nose, although people casually refer to the ogive as either the end of the ogive (where the curve of the nose terminates into the bearing surface, typically somewhere around the middle of the bullet), where the bullet contacts the lands, or where they are measuring with a comparator. Throw in the variations and inconsistencies across comparators & you’ve really got a mess. Other people’s measurements will often get you very close, but you’ll need some agency at the end of the day.
Seating stems contact the bullet in front of where the ogive is measured with a comparator. You will see inconsistency in dimensions from that contact point and the end of ogive (or where people are measuring with a comparator)… hence my joke in post #13. Some manufacturers produce bullets with remarkably consistent dimensions, however.
Yeah I’m starting to learn that Hornady bullets are… special! lol. I was drawn to them because my rifle shot the factory ELD-M so well but lately I’ve been wanting to gravitate towards Sierra, Nosler and Berger.
The more I learn about reloading, the more my head spins lol. I thought .002 off the lands was a great starting point to find a low ES and then go from there and now I’m questioning the meaning of life because of you guys lol. 0.005 sounds reasonable though. Enough of a jump to find a true ES and then play with seating depth afterwards.
The more I learn about reloading, the more my head spins lol. I thought .002 off the lands was a great starting point to find a low ES and then go from there and now I’m questioning the meaning of life because of you guys lol. 0.005 sounds reasonable though. Enough of a jump to find a true ES and then play with seating depth afterwards.
Many people shoot Hornady bullets with great effect… don’t be afraid to give them a shot
If you wish to make your life much easier, load the 140s to 2.8” and work powder up to the velocity you need. Skip the other projectiles, there’s a reason almost everyone shoots a 140 in 6.5.
I shoot 43.5 grains of Staball 6.5, but with that near max I would recommend doing your own pressure testing.
I shoot 43.5 grains of Staball 6.5, but with that near max I would recommend doing your own pressure testing.
Definitely work up. I got pressure today with 43.5gr under 130smks @ 0.020" in FC SRP (2930fps, SD7fps, 28"bbl, suppressed)
But @Gentleman4561 has a good point, if you're learning to reload it's better to start with components that are widely used. Also I'd start with an extruded powder like H4350. Sphericals aren't bad, but they're not the best place to start.
e: if you already have the Staball 6.5, just run it. Here's a thread
Last edited:
Agreed,
I am
140 ELDM
43.5 Staball 6.5
26” barrel
2820 FPS
Have loaded Lapua and Federal small rifle primer brass with no signs of pressure, but that doesn’t meant it wont be over pressure in your gun.
I don't recollect recommending being .010....ten thousandths...off. Might be what works but I believe that people generally start at .020" and work out...but again, I'm no expert.
Don't forget what ever load you come up with needs to fit the magazine, right?
Bench rest guys are reputed to like to jam but I've never been sure why.
I reload Berger 140 HTs and with a SAAMI chamber the closest I can get and stay in mag length is about .070" off. I have a barrel (not shot yet) that @FisherT&C did for me with .150" of free bore vs SAAMI .199" just so I do some load development starting closer....like .020-.030" off but I expect to push this back as these bullets seem to like some jump.
And remember, there is throat erosion with round you shoot...some say up to .003 ever 100 rounds (but this is very dependent on the caliber). I don't chase the lands but I'm not a competitive shooter.
Best of luck
A note on COAL and your Bergara action -
While you can fit 2.87" ish COAL in a standard AICS magazine, and you can fit 2.96" ish COAL in a "binderless" AICS magazine, and you can seat both of those magazines into your Bergara's magazine well, the rounds will NOT reliably clear your receiver's feed ramp if COAL is any longer than 2.800" or so. Sure, give or take a bit, but you'll be at the mercy of projectile shape. I've had issues where rounds fail to clear the feedramp and nosedive underneath it from moving forward in the magazine due to field handling with COAL as short as 2.820".
If your reloads need to reliably feed out of an AICS magazine in your Bergara rifle, I recommend sticking to COAL of 2.800" and sticking with magazines that are thicker up front to limit the forward travel of rounds. In other words, avoid magazines that advertise the ability to load long COAL rounds, such as "binderless" designs from MDT and Accurate. Magazines such as Magpul and MDT Polymer with thick front sections gave me the best chance at reliable feeding.
You'll find that this means your projectiles will be jumping quite a bit, and you may find in testing that it's an absolute nonissue for you. I've seen studies where folks had phenomenal results with jump approaching 0.200"
There's a ton to learn here, and honestly I'll defer to the others and nudge you to read a few of the well known reloading manuals cover-to-cover to get a good base of knowledge under your feet before proceeding. Some of the things you read about folks doing on the internet just aren't applicable to magazine fed factory rifles with standard feedramps.
While you can fit 2.87" ish COAL in a standard AICS magazine, and you can fit 2.96" ish COAL in a "binderless" AICS magazine, and you can seat both of those magazines into your Bergara's magazine well, the rounds will NOT reliably clear your receiver's feed ramp if COAL is any longer than 2.800" or so. Sure, give or take a bit, but you'll be at the mercy of projectile shape. I've had issues where rounds fail to clear the feedramp and nosedive underneath it from moving forward in the magazine due to field handling with COAL as short as 2.820".
If your reloads need to reliably feed out of an AICS magazine in your Bergara rifle, I recommend sticking to COAL of 2.800" and sticking with magazines that are thicker up front to limit the forward travel of rounds. In other words, avoid magazines that advertise the ability to load long COAL rounds, such as "binderless" designs from MDT and Accurate. Magazines such as Magpul and MDT Polymer with thick front sections gave me the best chance at reliable feeding.
You'll find that this means your projectiles will be jumping quite a bit, and you may find in testing that it's an absolute nonissue for you. I've seen studies where folks had phenomenal results with jump approaching 0.200"
There's a ton to learn here, and honestly I'll defer to the others and nudge you to read a few of the well known reloading manuals cover-to-cover to get a good base of knowledge under your feet before proceeding. Some of the things you read about folks doing on the internet just aren't applicable to magazine fed factory rifles with standard feedramps.
sorry I quoted the wrong person, it was Doom on #12.
But I see what you guys are saying. I think I’m trying to do too much at once. Evaluate projectiles, powder, seating depth all at the same time. Probably better to seat at SAAMI or close to, to find the right combo to then push forward with.
I have a few Magpul magazines and definitely don’t want to scrap and buy all new, specially at the MDT price tag. Thanks for the heads up
Another good one, although the test in question only went up to 0.095" of jump, the discussion afterwards points to the sorts of longer jumps I was referring to earlier:
PRB Entry on Bullet Jump Research from SAC's Mark Gordon
PRB Entry on Bullet Jump Research from SAC's Mark Gordon
I'll throw in something on the seating depth. Remington is famous for long throating their 308 caliber rifles, in particular the 308 Winchester. If I were to try and jamb a 168 SMK in that rifle only the boat tail would be in the case. Roy Weatherby set up any number of cartridges and every one of them is long throated and designed for quite a bit of jump. Most bullets with the exception of some of the early design VLD bullets do tolerate jump very well. Many accomplished shooters have found that loading just off the lands is also very sensitive in terms of target results which requires "chasing the lands" as the throat wears. They look for a range of seating depth so the rifle remains consistent over a large number of rounds.
I shoot a lot of 223 with 53 grain Sierra Matching bullets and was always puzzled by the various COALs in various loading manuals. I had always used 2.22" but after trying some 53gr EDIT: Long story, tried 2.250" and got identical target results at 100 and 300 yds.
@Char'ed Cuterie's link to Mark Gordon's testing is well worth the read. And while I don't always agree with him Eric Cortina has a good series:
Last edited:
Loved this article and this was a powerful line, “Those two things seem to present a problem for those of us who might fire 100-200 rounds in a single match, because by the last stage our bullet jump could be 0.014” longer than it was on the first stage. If changing bullet jump by 0.002-0.005 inches can have a “dramatic” impact on precision, what will 3 times that much do?”
Thanks for sharing
THanks, track pad issue. See post above.Missing the rest of the sentence?
FWIW, I’m jumping Berger 140s almost .140 and produced these 3 shot groups with a charge weight .2 from one another during testing. Just to add to the seating depth conversation.
