Range Report New M118LR loading from Federal

#102
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

Okay,

Pulled out some Varget and IMR4064. Tried to take pictures, but couldn't get anything of value. The IMR4064 is graphite in color and about 1/3 longer than Varget. Same shape otherwise.

Also, These loads for the military are going to be loaded to max pressure for the worst conditions. That may be why the low load charge compared to what is listed.

Do we have a winner? We will probably not know for sure until someone in the know spills the beans.
 
#103
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

Interesting thread for sure. I'm gonna do some QL calculations tomorrow, given the Navy load data (bullet, case volume, COAL, MV and barrel length) that has been presented. I've been using Varget for precision shooting, and RL15 for make-believe M118LR in LC cases for my GAP M40A1. If there is something that works better than Varget for launching a 175SMK, I ready to rock and roll with it.
 
#105
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LiteTac</div><div class="ubbcode-body">These loads for the military are going to be loaded to max pressure for the worst conditions. That may be why the low load charge compared to what is listed.</div></div>

No, the low charge weight is because they used a faster burning powder than what is normally use with that bullet. They did so to ensure that there would be a complete powder burn, and therefore, low muzzle flash. The granules being longer than Varget would ensure that you still get a good case fill.

If you read the presentation listed above, low muzzle flash and temperature stability were among the goals. Along with the charge weight and velocity, these will be the indicators of the right powder.

IMR4064 is too slow to launch the 175 that fast at only 40.2 gr.

Anyone wishing to test some of these should also use heavy neck tension, as that would be the case in a military cartridge. This will also increase the velocity a bit.
 
#106
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: kombayotch</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
LiteTac said:
Anyone wishing to test some of these should also use heavy neck tension, as that would be the case in a military cartridge. This will also increase the velocity a bit. </div></div>

Wouldn't high neck tension tend to reduce temperature dependence to a degree by defining the peak pressure by neck release at pressure spike? Just curious 'cuz it seems some non-sensitive powders are and some sensitive ones aren't depending on case volume and loading. Just asking, very interesting thread.
Click to expand...
 
#107
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

Haven't studied that so I can't say.

But, your mention of case volume reminded me of another point: That 2735 fps quoted was out of a Krieger barrel that probably has a tight match chamber. If you're running a factory barrel and/or large chamber, that velocity may very well be closer to 2600 fps. Something to remember... That would apply to QL simulations as well.
 
#108
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: kombayotch</div><div class="ubbcode-body">IMR 3031 is too slow to give 2735 fps with only 40.2 gr. (It would require around 43.1 grains)
IMR 4198 matches up better...</div></div>

Not true, IMR 3031 looks like a good match to the data, especially if a 5R were used to obtain the MV data.

Given the following, gleaned from previous posts:

* 175SMK
* 55.2 grain water volume of the case
* 40.2 grains of powder X
* 2.810" COAL

Then QL caculations with IMR 3031 give 2,537fps with a 20" barrel, 2,629fps with a 24" barrel (gotta match the current spec for M118LR since shooters are trained for it), and 2,667fps with a 26" barrel. A good 5R barrel gives roughly another 50fps in my experience, so the first and third QL caculations would match with the measured MVs given earlier if one were used.

I don't know what IMR 3031 looks like, nor anything about its temp sensitivity - presumably it can be researched online.

PS The Navy vugraphs suggested this round could be used in a semi-auto, so the pressure can't be huge. QL calculated a modest 53.5kpsi peak pressure for IMR 3031.
 
#111
#112
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

That will have to be on the back burner, I'm working on precision 6XC and 223Rem reloads in the next couple weeks. I don't shoot 308Win very much anymore and still have a couple hundred loaded rounds ready to go.

BTW, one of the clues is that it's an IMR type powder. Pretty clear.
 
#113
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

The poster did not know the specifics of the load and was referring to appearance only. According to the distributor, Norma 201 is grey and slightly longer than Varget. Norma powder is made by Bofors, the same company that makes many of the Alliant powders... all the ones that say "Made in Sweden"
 
#114
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

For visual reference, 3031 top Varget on the bottom.

IMG_5171.jpg
 
#115
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

I just did a Norma 201 QL calculation and the MV is too low. With a 24" barrel, the prescribed load gives 2,534fps - too low to meet the "2600 MV" quoted spec for M118LR. Looks more and more like it's IMR 3031 to me.

Thanks for the comparitive pix of Varget and IMR 3031, MLC. I would have done it myself, but I can't find the spoon.

For those with all the components in hand, I see the following description of the new Federal M118LR load developing in my head:

* 308Win case with water volume of 55.2 grains of water. (Don't have my notebook here to see what I have measured for Lapua and Winchester brass.)
* 175SMK
* Federal 210/210M primer (but also try a CCI BR2 to see which is more accurate).
* 40.2 grains of IMR 3031
* COAL 2.810"

The amount of propellant can be adjusted slightly to offset a difference in case volume. If you give me the case volume, I can use QL to calculate the amount of 3031 to give the same MV as the Federal round.

After all the fun we've had with this, I'm wondering whether this load is any better than one with 43.0 grains of RL15? Not all of the RL15 is burned and there is a bit more recoil, but which is more accurate?
 
#118
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

Lets see how it does with temperature deviation...

A temperature test is easy enough to do with two coolers, some ice and a heating pad.

btw, Hodgdon lists IMR3031 in their load data with the 175 SMK:
175 GR. SIE HPBT IMR 3031 .308" 2.800" 41.3 gr. 2653 fps. 59,100 PSI

Difference in charge is about right if Winchester brass was used in a factory chamber.
 
#121
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: One-Eyed Jack</div><div class="ubbcode-body">After all the fun we've had with this, I'm wondering whether this load is any better than one with 43.0 grains of RL15? Not all of the RL15 is burned and there is a bit more recoil, but which is more accurate? </div></div>

43.0gr of RL15 has been my go-to load for the longest time, to me, the most dependable one, so far (for my rifle).

Now, after all the fun we've had with this exercise, I'm wondering whether this Mk316 load will be as good as a load with the new Alliant Power Pro Medium Rifle, it is very, very promising, in terms of its performance.... anyways, let's make this Mk316 load first, then we'll play with PP-MedRifle when it comes out!


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Dr. Phil</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Sounds like the verdict is in, IMR 3031
STD or Magnum Primer though? </div></div>

Seems like FGMM primer, FED210M?
 
#122
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

Does anyone have any information about temperature stability of 30301? Varget is well known as a Hodgdon Extreme powder, but it requires a compressed load to achieve the same MV as the 3031 Federal load in a case with 55.2 grain water volume. The Federal load is close to 99% of case capacity, but not compressed. Neat!

Jicko, I mentioned 43.0 grains of RL15 because that's the amount needed to give the same MV as 3031 in the Federal load. Coincidence? Maybe not - this MV could be a sweet spot for a lot of barrels, like 168GMM.
 
#124
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

1Small,
Which Power Pro MR, 2000 or 4000? I have tried to find some more info on this and there is not a lot out there yet. I see where they talk about 4000 being used in 7mm mags, but nothing about .308's. Alliant's site is not very good with load data unless you are using specific Speer bullets. I went to the range last night with SMK 175's, 44.3 gr Varget, WIN brass and plain WIN lg primers got avg 2713fps avg 30 rds from my 5R. Still consider myself new to reloading so all the info helps.
Thanks
 
#125
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: MLC</div><div class="ubbcode-body">40.2 grains dropped from a 4" tube fills to just above the shoulder in FGMM brass. </div></div>

Went back and checked the ppt, quote: Developed a <span style="font-weight: bold">new</span>, 7.62mm Match Cartridge case from our experience with 308 Win. Gold Medal match cartridge. Emphasis mine. Pic shows annealed neck but this is normal w/mil ammo, right? And it's noted the Fed match primer is used.
 
#127
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

CoryT reported Mk316 brass capacity at 55.2gn and 81STFACP reports FGMM at 54.6gn which is a difference of about a percent from the published 55.2 number, seems like it'd be within measurement error to me but I'm no expert to say the least.

By new I'm guessing Federal is referring to case head design, more uniform concentricity and/or neck tension, different or tighter control of neck temper, brass thickness at the neck or maybe more uniform brass thickness around the body of the case, dunno. But it doesn't look like new means a different case capacity.

As was already mentioned the chamber matters so are the chamber drawings for the M40Ax in the public domain? Yeah, I know it's a dumb question but I'm guessing someone on this thread knows the _right_ answer. TIA.
 
#128
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

FGMM brass probably won't meet the mil spec for, say, LC brass. So it's not a surprise that Federal did something to their brass to make it meet the mil spec.

The water volume should be that of an expended case, not a fully resized case. So, chamber dimensions make a difference since the case will have the shape of the chamber. We're just making ballpark calculations here with QL, I don't care if it's not the case volume for my chamber.

I recall LC brass having smaller water volume than commercial cases, the head and web are probably thicker brass.

I'm going to look for some IMR 3031 locally next week when I get back to NV.

Did anyone find info about IMR 3031 environmental stability? The Hodgdon/IMR website has incredibly little information about 3031.
 
#129
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

I did a hasty test of IMR-3031 this afternoon at the farm.
It was about 66 degrees and 92% humidity, my location is about 250' asl.

My rifle has a 26.25 inch, 4 groove, 1/10 barrel and an SWR Omega suppressor.
I have been shooting hBN coated bullets in the rifle so I scrubbed it thoroughly before shooting.

I loaded 20 rounds with an oal of 2.810, 40.2 grains of IMR-3031 with a naked 175 Sierra.
15 in FGGM brass and 5 in LC M118LR brass primed with 210M's.
Both were FL resized with a .336 neck bushing. All loads were thrown with a Lee Perfect powder measure then trickled to 40.2
In the 20 throws I felt 1 kernel catch slightly.

I set up a target at 100 yards and my Oehler 35P with 3 screens 2' apart 10' from the muzzle of the rifle.
I was shooting from the prone and it was tough to get the Oehler in a good position. I resorted bolting it onto a milk crate.
To obtain a clear sight picture and not shoot my screens I used a cinder block under my bipod and supported the rear with my off hand.
It was not a rock solid position but proved to be adequate as my Oehler survived and I hit the target.

IMG_5182.jpg


I shot the 5 rounds using the LC cases first to check zero and foul the barrel.
5 shots went into about an inch with the following numbers:
hi 2622
lo 2588
av 2605
es 34
sd 13

The upper left hole is cbs, upper right I jerked.

IMG_5177.jpg




To simulate colder weather I put 5 rounds in my freezer then transferred them to the farm in a cooler sandwiched between two gel freezer packs.
I used an indoor outdoor thermometer with a wired probe to check the temperature in the cooler.
The cooler temp was 40 degrees and when I inserted the probe between the ice packs it was 23 degrees.
I did not have sufficient time to let the barrel cool between shots so I purged the barrel and suppressor with dustoff in an attempt to cool the barrel and chamber. One shot was left too long in the chamber and I think it shows in the high ES/SD.

hi 2668
lo 2608
av 2640
es 70
sd 23

IMG_5178.jpg


I purged the rifle and let it cool while I checked the target then fired 5 rounds at ambient temperature. I tried using another rear rest technique and it was unsatisfactory.

hi 2702
lo 2648
av 2678
es 54
sd 22

My brother was taking notes for me and I used him to simulate warm weather by stowing the last 5 rounds in his armpit. I took advantage of the warm rifle and fired the last 5 rounds immediately after the ambient temp string. His pit hovered around 96 degrees and the chamber area was warm to the touch.

hi 2707
lo 2674
av 2697
es 33
sd 12

Last 2 groups, 1 MOA elevation adjustment between them, ambient on top:

IMG_5181.jpg
 
#131
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

No, but the shooting position was uncomfortable and awkward at best.
I think that the groups could be cut in half by a better technique.
As I have time I will continue to shoot the load and see how it performs.
 
#132
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

What make of barrel is it and what chamber?

I think more temperature testing is needed, in addition to some verification of low muzzle flash. I would also go with a 0.334" bushing for loading the next batch.

If my action wrench and barrel vice arrive, I may be able to do some testing the weekend after next.
 
#133
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

The barrel is a Lilja SS barrel.
The chamber was cut by Mark King and in his words was set up for Federal Gold Medal Match.
I'm not sure about the .334 as I had the case necks shave some copper from the bullets while seating.
 
#134
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

The neck thickness should be the same as Lapua, and that should only be about 0.002" neck tension. It should not shave... how much are you chamfering your necks after trimming?
 
#136
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

FWI, got a message back from Norma which contradicts the distributor. Says that N201 is 1.1mm long, which is shorter than Varget.
 
#137
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

MLC:

Would love to do a companion test for you, but there's no 3031 to be found around here or the surrounding 150 miles.

However, it looks like the temperature stability is NOT there with 3031.

I remember seeing some testing during the last year which tended to isolate how much of the temperature variations affecting velocity were related to the ammo/powder temp, and how much was the rifle temp.
 
#138
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

Might require a magnum primer to get the temperature stability... lets explore all avenues before dismissing it. Higher neck tension might also help.
 
#141
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: kombayotch</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Might require a magnum primer to get the temperature stability... lets explore all avenues before dismissing it. Higher neck tension might also help. </div></div>

Komboyotch,

Here is what I can contribute, but it will not be till I get back in country next week. If someone is already doing this testing, let me know. I do want to repeat work

For control data I intend to shoot M118LR sublot B. If I do not have enough of the sublot B (need to verify when I get home), I will shoot the CMP M118LRs, which I have plenty of.

Using the 3031 load of 40.2 and 175 SMKs
1. Test with new LC brass with CCI 34
2. Test with brand new FGMM brass, disassembled from FGMM ammo
3. Same as number 2 but substitute primer with CCI 34

All the above combo will be shot in these rifles
1. GAP AR10 24 inch barrel
2. SR-25 Match, this may have an Obermeyer factory barrel
3. Remington VFSS rechambered with Oberneyer reamer and re-crowned
4. AR10 tight bore 308 .298 x .3065 with the same chamber as bullet 3 above. I just need to take it to Mark Pharr so he can cut down the barrel from 32 to 20 (my future m110)
5. M1A with 10 twist, 22 inch barrel
6. M1A with 12 twist, 22 incb barrel

I also have brand new Lapuas, Winchesters, and IMI match. The IMI brass has the smallest case capacity. If I remember they were in the 53.XX range. Do you want to add to the matrix? What do you want for output, groups and average velocity? How many shots per load, per gun, is 3 shot group enough? Small sample I know, but we are looking for big change.

For round robin, I will shoot one load combo across all guns and move to the next load once the rifles cool back down. Should not take that long of a cool down if we stick with 3 shot groups.

BTW, in a 102 degree weather shooting the RTE/PWS built M40a1, the M118LRs sublot B shot great and chronoed at around 2700 I think, I have the data at home, but I know for sure the average velocity was slightly over 2700.

LMK


 
#142
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

Glad you want to contribute. But, until we can verify the temperature stability and confirm that IMR3031 is the powder, I would limit it to only one of the above: the Remington. Groups only need to be verified at ambient temperature. I'd do a few 5 shot groups.

What is most important right now is temperature testing; verifying the velocity (AVG & SD) at different temperatures. When firing the shots for temperature verification, don't worry about groups. The extra time in the chamber spent aiming will change the temperature of the rounds. Let the barrel cool completely between shots. Then for each shot, remove a single round from hot/cold storage, put it in the chamber and fire it as quickly as you can. I set the scope magnification to the lowest setting and just make sure that I'm putting them through the chrono. 10-15 shots at hot and cold temperatures would be the least I'd shot. Alternating between this load and LR118 would be very informative.

Lapua brass would have an internal volume closest to the brass used in the new rounds (~55 gr.).

Once we isolate the powder, benchmarking against LR118 in different platforms will be the next step. Then its really just an accuracy and velocity comparison at ambient temperature.
 
#143
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

I will test the Remington five shot groups with new Lapua brass. For temp sensitivity I'll see what I can do for the temp extreme test with a proper temperature verification.

For primers I will stick with the CCI 34s.
 
#144
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

On any of the test loads which involve dismantling unfired cases, PLEASE make sure you neck size them before seating the bullets.

Ever make "Mexican Match"? I did about 8 years ago, and not tightening up the necks was good for about 40 fps.

The above comments about high neck tension would seem to make this sub-step even MORE important for this exercise.
 
#145
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Grump</div><div class="ubbcode-body">On any of the test loads which involve dismantling unfired cases, PLEASE make sure you neck size them before seating the bullets.

Ever make "Mexican Match"? I did about 8 years ago, and not tightening up the necks was good for about 40 fps.

The above comments about high neck tension would seem to make this sub-step even MORE important for this exercise. </div></div>

Thank you. I am set up for Mexican Match. One of my Dillons is set just for it. What size bushing do you recommend for best neck tension?
 
#147
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: kombayotch</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Anyone get a chance to do any additional testing? </div></div>

Just got home from the range.

After work I headed to the range. It was raining and cloudy I was not even sure if the Oehler would pick up, it did till it got too dark and missed some shots. You will see in the spreadsheet what the numbers are for the 10 rounds under ambient condition.

After I finished the 10 rounds I heated the remaining rounds in the truck by turning the heater full on with the rounds on the floor passenger side. The rounds were heated for about 10 minutes to where I can feel the elevated temperature with my hands. When I started shooting the heated rounds I just took enough time to write down the velocity and grab another round and shoot. I finished the 10 rounds in 8 minutes. As you will see some of the rounds did not register due to cloudy and darkening condition

I would have the temperature of inside the cab or the heated air coming out but my Kerstel quit - battery ran dry.

264gw0n.jpg
 
#148
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: CoryT</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The standard M118LR <span style="text-decoration: line-through">ball</span> [correction: current m118LR uses RE 15, thanks Two Shooes for the point out] powder loading shifts velocity almost 1 fps per degree F. My tests of the new loading show it shifts less than 20 fps average from 0F to 100F, plus the SD over a 40 round string was only 15fps.</div></div>

You were probably in the 90's at best inside the truck and you have about a 26 fps. shift. Definitely not 20 fps. over 100 deg. F. So we have two tests that, although not extensive or controlled, seem to indicate that IMR3031 is not the temperature stable powder we are looking for. We should probably finish evaluating it thoroughly, but also start looking at the other options.

I need to order some RL-25 next week, so I may get some N201 unless more testing shows 3031 to be temperature stable after all. M215's are supposed to be really hot, that may be the key. However, IMR3031 has been around for ages (long before the 'H' extreme powders), which is why I find it a bit hard to believe that nobody would have discovered its temperature stable properties if it possessed any. Its a bit easier to believe that nobody would know this about N201 since it isn't very common here. And that connection between Alliant/ATK and Bofors of Sweden keeps popping back into my mind.
 
#149
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

The superimposed 20 shot composite group did not look all that great either. Shot at 200 while doing the chrono, and the group is around a minute, but nice and round.

Just for kicks I may try some 215s next time out. The 201 may be the ticket.
 
#150
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

Check this out (its an older Accurate manual):
http://www.scribd.com/doc/19414419/Accurate

Look at p.33 of the file (p. 20 in the document) in particular. Here is a screen capture of the interesting stuff:

untitled.jpg


Plotting the data, it can be derived that the velocity only changes 38 fps. from 0F to 100F with the R39 primer. Primer makes a difference... as does neck tension, I believe.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
JP rifles LRI-20 6.5CM load development
Replies
2
Views
955
Stingertrey
S
K
My quick and dirty load development for hunting this year
Replies
15
Views
2K
KnowNothing256
K
M
Return Of The M193 Clones
Replies
11
Views
5K
Molon
M
DIYguy
Sierra SMK 175 & Varget loads
Replies
8
Views
6K
bfk4lyfe
B
M
Federal 69 grain Gold Medal Match Ammunition Accuracy
Replies
23
Views
11K
Neurotic
N
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Merch
Alerts