130gr RDF Data?

[ShebasDad]

Ok so Im not going to test both Varget and H4350 as time is limited. I loaded up 36.6g Varget for the seating depth test.

I loaded the following

2.152" - Touching Lands
2.144" - .01" off
2.134" - .02" off
2.124" - .03" off
2.114" - .04" off
2.104" - .05" off
2.094" - .06" off

So was your choice of the 36.6 load based on the SD? The 37gr load showed a smaller vertical spread wouldn't that load be easier to tighten up?

still learning and trying to learn what to look for.

Thanks Bill

 

[padom]

So was your choice of the 36.6 load based on the SD? The 37gr load showed a smaller vertical spread wouldn't that load be easier to tighten up?

still learning and trying to learn what to look for.

Thanks Bill

Based off of the velocity being almost identical between 36.4 and 36.6, the SD and POI. With these RDF's not being the tightest shooting .01" off the lands, we will see how groups tighten up with this seating depth test. If I find a known seating depth that really tightens things up then I will probably go back and shoot 36.2, 36.4, 36.6, 36.8 and 37.0 with the optimal seating depth to confirm consistent POI. If groups dont tighten up Im done testing the 130 RDF's.

 

[padom]

Well here's your seating depth test target. Definitely didnt get better farther from the lands. Best groups were actually touching and .01" off. Im dont testing any further as the results are far from the accuracy Im getting with other bullets.

 

[Bull81]

Tested the 130’s over the weekend with varget out of my 6.5x47. My results were pretty much identical to Padom’s. Went from 36 grains up to 37.8 in .3 gr increments. Started getting flattened primers at 37.2 and sticky bolt at 37.5 and 37.8. Max velocity out of my 24 in bartlien was 2812, which is only 50 fps faster than my go to 140 load. Accuracy was pretty good but every group had a flyer. Two would go through the same hole then one would open it up to around .75ish. I did not do a seating depth test for several reason, 1 the velocity gain wasn’t worth the time, 2 I was already jumping them .060 in order to keep enough bullet in the neck of the brass. The base to ogive measurement for the 130’s in my rifle is 2.160 and the 140’s is 2.156. With the 130’s being about .085 shorter than the 140’s. Now I have noticed the RDF’s vary quite a bit lot to lot, older lots are usually shorter when loaded to the lands. I have a new lot of the 140’s that measures 2.156 and an old lot that measures 2.112. Maybe something is wrong with the first batch of 130’s and that’s why they are blems.

 

[Sierra770]

None of the RDF blems ever performed well for me.

 

[Sierra770]

Meant to type that they haven't performed as well as non blems.

 

[whatsupdoc]

Meant to type that they haven't performed as well as non blems.

So your saying that the blems have issues that the regular production do not.

 

[Sierra770]

So your saying that the blems have issues that the regular production do not.

My personal non scientific experience with 140 and 175 RDF, blems vs non blems, had the non blems with less flyers and smaller/more consistent group sizes. The blems were still accurate and were certainly good enough for practice drills, but I wouldn't take them to a match.

 

[Yondering]

Meant to type that they haven't performed as well as non blems.

I have encountered the same thing with other Nosler bullets (Ballistic Tips for example). Nosler says the blems are cosmetic only, but after watching the lady sort them and hearing her reject criteria, it sounds to me like the blems may include some bullets with concentricity issues or other deformities. (That was on a tour of the facility, neat place and worth a tour if you're in the area.)

I can say for sure that the 6.5 129gr ABLR bullets I got recently as blems have some definite imperfections in the bases, in the form of lips or burrs unevenly around the base. I haven't shot these for accuracy yet, but plan to try a batch with the burrs removed, and a batch without. I've never bought the non-blem version of this bullet, but have to guess they don't have the same issue. No such issues with the 130 RDF bullets I received, but of course they're made in different tooling.

 

[dannySH]

I had problems with the RDF 140 blems too on my 6.5CM with Josh Rock Creek barrel. No way they can group well, you could get a very good 3 shots group but suddenly you get a flier trashing the group. Tried with H4350 and IMR4451, seating from 0.01" trhu 0.06" off the lands. With the ELD-M 140gr I can get 1/3 MOA 5 shots group with both powders at 0.020" off the lands all day long.

 

[padom]

I had the same issues Im having with blems with non blems in 70RDF and 140 RDF in PVA Bartlein and Rock Creek barrels. Higher than normal SD's and mediocre accuracy compared to multiple other bullets tested in the same guns. If I have to put extensive amounts of time and money in components testing a bullet with multiple powders to get them to shoot they arent worth my time. When I can stick a ELD-M, Hybrid SMK or Scenar into a case and virtually every charge shoots way better than an RDF in the same gun then its not worth my time.

 

[kthomas]

The RDF's I have are the NON-blem versions. Too many unaccounted for fliers. Going to test a bit with more with my new faster twist barrel, as I have about ~1,000 of the RDF's laying around. Verdict still out on the new barrel until I do some more testing.

From what I've seen so far, I see no reason to purchase the RDF's over ELD-M's or Hybrid bullets.

 

[whatsupdoc]

Tried the 140s in both my Creedmoor's they were not terrible but they would not group as well as my bergers. Now I use them for foulers.

Guess I willl use my 130 Blems for the same.

 

[Beneviolence]

Just attempted load development with the blemish 130 RDF's and had horrible results. I've been doing awesome with the 140 RDF's so I don't know what's up with these. 2.930" COAL (70 thou off the lands), 42-44gr RL16, lapua brass, CCI 450's and was getting getting 250-2950 ft/s from a 24" CTR. ES/SD was high and groupings were >1MOA easily. Showed MAYBE signs of tightening up at the upper end but I wasn't sure of pushing it more.

 

[308Gunner]

I did a limited test with the 130 blems, I started at 43.5 gr of H4350 up to 43.7 the 43.7 load showed promise at a .6 group I am going to go up to 44 and see if i can find pressure signs. I am shooting a 6.5 Super LR with a 1-7 twist Broughton, this gun liked the 130 Golden Targets at 43.7 but when I tested the 140 RDF's I found that I had to go up .1 grains to get the same speed and accuracy as my normal 140 load. After I find a load I will start running seating depths to see what I can do, I loaded the first test @ 2.800

 

[sig2009]

The 140 RDF do better than the ELDM in my rifle. ELDS suck.

 

[whatsupdoc]

The 130 blems gave me nothing, 100 yards 1.275, 1.053 1.034 with R17, 140 ELDS were at .7 to .8 142 SMK were at .8

 

[Redeye3]

I've loaded around 100 for testing with H4350, from 41gr - 44gr. Tried .030jump and .060 in bartlien 26" 6.5creed

Speed at 44gr was 2890 but like others said to many unexplained flyers (2 in 1 hole other 1.5off) and Velocity swing, I'm swapping them into another rifle this weekend for additional confirmation. Also will try 4451/Rl16/Varget--- I dont like giving up easy!!

 

[dannySH]

Good luck @Redeye3 I ended up selling all the RDFs I had left after almost two months and hundreds of rounds of development in two different rifles.

 

[Redeye3]

Lol, great I feel confident now