Well, I decided that I would share some of my findings regarding my GAP M2008 Lapua Mag. First off, specs and a picture.
Specs:
M2008 Lapua Action w/20 MOA base
28" Bartlein 1-9.7" twist barrel, MTU contour
Badger FTE
Badger Rings
NF 5.5-22x50 w/NP-R1
Remington 40X trigger
AICS 2.0 LA w/AIAW skins
I currently have 232 rounds down the tube and have used RL25 and just recently experimented with RL22. I have developed loads with 250gr Scenars and 300SMK both of which are <span style="text-decoration: underline"><span style="font-weight: bold">BN coated</span></span>
Did my initial load development with RL25 and 250gr Scenar's. I use the OCW method but I base my best load on group size. Here is what I found (used Oehler 35P crony and all load development done at 100 yards and unless otherwise stated all were three shot groups):
I was able to push the 250 Scenars to 3050fps using 94.5 gr of RL25. Accuracy node was at 93.5gr RL25 (~3000fps). Gun grouped in the mid .3's (3 shots). Tried this load at distance (1000 yds) and it did well but something just didn't feel right.
I decided to do another OCW using RL25 and see if I could replicate my first load development. Yep, 93.5 gr looked good but group was in the high .4's (still around 3000fps).
I had spoke to a number of people regarding powder (prior to the rifle being finished and decided that I would try RL22. Marty Bordson and Scott Hansen both recommended RL22. I first did a pressure test and decided that I could go up to 91.0gr when I started to see slight ejector marks.
Did another OCW and found that 89.0 gr RL22 produced groups in the high .2's. My sighters using 88.5 produced a group in the mid .3's. The 89.0gr load is throwing the 250's at 2990 or so. I'll take it.
What I liked about the RL22 load was the fact that the rounds seemed to go into the same group effortlessly. I wasn't feeling that with the RL25 loads. The RL25 loads seemed to be inconsistent when I shot them at distance.
Now for 300gr SMK's:
I decided from the beginning that RL25 was the powder I was going to use. So I first did my pressure test and found that I could easily go to 91.0 grains and push them at 2850fps. During my pressure test I found that 89.5, 90.0, 90.5 and 91gr loads pretty much shot through the same hole (4 shots in a group of .319")
With this information I decided to try only two loads with RL25; 90.5 and 91.0 grains. The 90.5 gr load produced a group of .349" and the 91.0gr load made a nice group of .391" (all 3 shot groups). Hmmm, that was the quickest I think I ever came up with a load.
I then shot the 300SMK's from 200yards out to 1000yards. My load development held true and the 300SMK's seemed to shoot better and were definitely consistent. Speeds are around 2825fps or so.
I know that doing load development at 100yards is not ideal but the 1000yd range I belong to is 2 hours away, while I have a 100yd range just 2 miles away. Well....you get it.
I am very pleased with the results and would like to thank George, Moon, Marty, Scott, Desert HK, Lt. ArcLight and Zak Smith for the input and constant questions that they answered.
Hope this review helps.
Tony
Specs:
M2008 Lapua Action w/20 MOA base
28" Bartlein 1-9.7" twist barrel, MTU contour
Badger FTE
Badger Rings
NF 5.5-22x50 w/NP-R1
Remington 40X trigger
AICS 2.0 LA w/AIAW skins
I currently have 232 rounds down the tube and have used RL25 and just recently experimented with RL22. I have developed loads with 250gr Scenars and 300SMK both of which are <span style="text-decoration: underline"><span style="font-weight: bold">BN coated</span></span>
Did my initial load development with RL25 and 250gr Scenar's. I use the OCW method but I base my best load on group size. Here is what I found (used Oehler 35P crony and all load development done at 100 yards and unless otherwise stated all were three shot groups):
I was able to push the 250 Scenars to 3050fps using 94.5 gr of RL25. Accuracy node was at 93.5gr RL25 (~3000fps). Gun grouped in the mid .3's (3 shots). Tried this load at distance (1000 yds) and it did well but something just didn't feel right.
I decided to do another OCW using RL25 and see if I could replicate my first load development. Yep, 93.5 gr looked good but group was in the high .4's (still around 3000fps).
I had spoke to a number of people regarding powder (prior to the rifle being finished and decided that I would try RL22. Marty Bordson and Scott Hansen both recommended RL22. I first did a pressure test and decided that I could go up to 91.0gr when I started to see slight ejector marks.
Did another OCW and found that 89.0 gr RL22 produced groups in the high .2's. My sighters using 88.5 produced a group in the mid .3's. The 89.0gr load is throwing the 250's at 2990 or so. I'll take it.
What I liked about the RL22 load was the fact that the rounds seemed to go into the same group effortlessly. I wasn't feeling that with the RL25 loads. The RL25 loads seemed to be inconsistent when I shot them at distance.
Now for 300gr SMK's:
I decided from the beginning that RL25 was the powder I was going to use. So I first did my pressure test and found that I could easily go to 91.0 grains and push them at 2850fps. During my pressure test I found that 89.5, 90.0, 90.5 and 91gr loads pretty much shot through the same hole (4 shots in a group of .319")
With this information I decided to try only two loads with RL25; 90.5 and 91.0 grains. The 90.5 gr load produced a group of .349" and the 91.0gr load made a nice group of .391" (all 3 shot groups). Hmmm, that was the quickest I think I ever came up with a load.
I then shot the 300SMK's from 200yards out to 1000yards. My load development held true and the 300SMK's seemed to shoot better and were definitely consistent. Speeds are around 2825fps or so.
I know that doing load development at 100yards is not ideal but the 1000yd range I belong to is 2 hours away, while I have a 100yd range just 2 miles away. Well....you get it.
I am very pleased with the results and would like to thank George, Moon, Marty, Scott, Desert HK, Lt. ArcLight and Zak Smith for the input and constant questions that they answered.
Hope this review helps.
Tony
