Range Report New M118LR loading from Federal

#151
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

Good work there Dr. K.

I thought I have some 215s, but what I have are 9 1/2 Magnums and CCI 250 Magnums. I will see if I can scrounge some 215s.

I can chill some rounds with ice packs and I can warm some up with a hair dryer. We have AC outlet on the high end of the rifle range. I need to borrow a good temp probe for proper control.

For neck tension, I have bushings from .326 to .336, which one do you think we should use? How about an extreme change to .330, that is an additional .004 from before.

What do you think about the CCI 250s? Should I try them as well? I heard the Military 34s are the same magnum compounds with thicker cups, but do not know for sure.

When I started playing with N540 in '96 I tried 7 1/2s and they are hotter than the CCI 450s, so the 9 1/2 may just be hotter than 250s or 34s as well. I still will try to source some 215s.

What do you suggest for a matrix?
 
#152
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

My data from primer testing with 41.8 gr. Varget and a 190 SMK:

BR2: 2553 fps. 53658 psi.
WLR: 2574 fps. 54562 psi.
210M: 2583 fps. 53644 psi.
9 1/2M: 2595 fps. 54249 psi.
CCI250: 2637 fps. 55726 psi.
WLRM: 2646 fps. 59221 psi.

I would use the CCI 250 primers... I suspect M215 are probably closer to those or WLRM.

Chill with ice packs and warm with a heating pad. I would use two small coolers and let the rounds soak for a good hour and measure the temperatures precisely. Your chart above looks great.
 
#153
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

If I can't get a lab temp meter, is the Kestrel 4500 in the cooler good enough for government work?

With the loaded ammo the same parameters as the previous trip (except for the primers), next time out I will just do the chilled and heated, no ambient to see the extreme, 10 shot each at 5 minute interval.

For additional information I will load two 5 round batches using .329 bushing (can't find my .330 must have loaned it), 5 to chill and 5 to heat to have a snap shot of the effect of higher neck tension.

Anything else you want to add?
 
#155
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 81STFACP</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><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? </div></div>
I got no recommendations here. I'm a FL-sizing only guy. Don't even own a neck sizer of any sort. Bushings *would* be the way to go...
 
#156
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: kombayotch</div><div class="ubbcode-body">No, that looks good. </div></div>

Dr. K.,

Today is another incomplete data gathering day on the range. This time I had to drive from other side of town. I took my chance and lost - ran out of time again. I used to stay on the range till 2100 and sun is just going down. Forgot summer is over.

1700 Hours – Before I started to the range I started chilling one batch, 10 sized with .334 and 5 sized with .329. The Kestrel was stored in the cooler along with the ammo. <span style="font-weight: bold">The ammo was sandwiched between the ice packs.</span>

1705 Hours – Stored the other batch under the hood before I stated driving, 10 sized with .334 and 5 sized with .329. The lowest temperature for intake air my ScanGaugeII registered was 85 F while on the toll road, in traffic air intake temperature went up to 114 F. AIr intake temperature is close enough to the under the hood temperature.

1745 Hours – arrived at the range, pulled the heated ammo from under the hood in wrapped them in the heat pad, put them inside the cooler and plugged in to the outlet. Note: When I transferred the ammo from the box to the heat pad they were warm to the touch.

Started setting up chronograph and bench and waited for ceasefire to hang target at 200 yards.
28slagw.jpg

123b1vd.jpg


Took picture of the Kestrel before firing. Had to open cooler slightly and turn on Kestrel, by the time the Kestrel registered reading the thermal shock to inside the cooler could have contributed to the reading I got, maybe the actual surface temperature of the ammo is less than the Kestrel reading. I do not have a way read surface temperature though. The ammo felt a lot cooler than 42 F, felt just like grabbing a can out of a cooler full of ice.
29b2c80.jpg


After taking picture of the chilled temperature I inserted the Kestrel in the heat blanket.

1830 Hours – I started shooting at 5 minute interval. You can see how far I got.
1900 Hours – After firing 7 rounds of the chilled ammo, the sun was going down rapidly that I decided to switch to the heated ammo. I thought I could fire off at least 5 rounds fast. AS IT WAS I ONLY ABLE TO REGISTER ONE SHOT AND THE OTHER TWO WERE NOT READ.
11cgiee.jpg


Took picture of temperature reading, slid the Kestrel from under the heat pad (one round slid with it, not the one I fired) Temperature read 111.4 F. I thought this is good enough delta from the chilled ones. Not sure how hot the heat pad can go.
24m711y.jpg


As I was collecting my stuff and it was almost dark so I took the opportunity to take a short video clip of the muzzle blast. I positioned the camera so the muzzle is a foreground to the dark side of the truck that if there is huge flash it will show better.
1935 Hours - I shot as at fast as I could aiming at the same target I used during testing. You can see the muzzle on almost all the shots going everywhere other than straight back.
View My Video

You can figure out in the group which ones are the ones I just let go. The ammo with the CCI250 is showing some signs that it wants to shoot.
dmz67l.jpg



I am not done yet. I might as well finish the box of Lapuas and the 1 lb container of IMR 3031. Next time I will spend a Saturday or Sunday so I can do a more thorough testing. I do think you are on the right track with the Magnum primers. Any suggestion on the next matrix?

Someone please do similar test to see what kind of results you get.
 
#157
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

That is great!!! I can't wait to the rest of the data. If your data so far is any indication, the other velocities shouldn't be that far from that one shot. This looks promising... Continue the way you are going.

I'm hoping the local guy gets some IMR3031 in next week.
 
#158
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

What do you think about the muzzle flash? The camera is about 8 ft away from the bench.

When I go down to South Texas I will try the ammo on target. I have access to a 1K range in Bruni. I can shoot it at night as well and video the flash in total darkness. We actually do the load development down there at night when the winds calm down, one truck shining on target, the other on the firing line. Sometimes into the wee hours of the morning. We do this when we don't intend to hunt the four legged Coyotes, but certainly discourage the two legged ones from crossing the property.
 
#159
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

81,
Boy, you're doing some homework. Good job! I might suggest a few things, but you must follow some strict safety rules:

1- How cold is dry ice? Can you get the ammo down to either -20 or -65F? Plus 40 is really not a good data point to analyze velocity delta of temperature. A bigger temp spread would be better. IF you do this, load up a step charge, and begin firing the cold rounds and hot rounds with reduced charge weight. Watch for pressure problems at BOTH temperatures. That's the safe way of doing it.

2- I built a box from R-max insulation. Place it on the floor boards of the vehicle, positioned so that the heater blows on the rounds. Believe me, it gets hot.

3- Kestrel is good, but can you pick up a lazer thermometer, or borrow one? That might assist as well.

4- Regarding muzzle flash, see if you can standardize a distance from muzzle, and always set the camera up at the same elevation, distance and angle from the muzzle. That way, all your data will be consistent.

I only mention these things because you seem to be a guy who really digs this stuff.
 
#160
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

Before getting too far into temperature testing, it may be useful to read the two articles I've linked below, which address these issues, especially the second, which suggests significant effects from the temperature of the <span style="font-style: italic">barrel</span>.

It's a lot easier to get ammo to a desirable temperature for testing than it is a barrel - and if the barrel temperature is a significant factor in temperature sensitivity, varying the ammo temperature may give results that have limited applicability if the goal is to find out how the muzzle velocity changes as a function of the ambient temperature.

http://www.snipershide.com/UserFiles/Image/articles/Pressure_Factors.pdf

http://www.snipershide.com/UserFiles/Image/articles/powder_primer_temp_experiment_2.pdf


 
#161
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

New guy here. I have been following the details of the "new" M118 LR for a while on the internet. I was thinking the powder was most likely IMR-3031 or maybe IMR-4895. Both are longer than Varget and dark. IMR-3031 and IMR-4064 are the same length and slightly longer than IMR-4895 and the slight difference in diameter is hard to see.

A few notes. The IMR 4 digit numbers are in order they were developed. IMR-3031 was developed in 1916 as "Dupont number 16". Dupont later changed the powder numbers to 4 digit numbers. IMR-4227 dates to 1934. IMR-4895 was developed in 1941. IMR-4320 and IMR-4475 are short powders used in factory loaded ammunition. IMR-4475 is similar to IMR-3031 in burning rate but short for machine loading. It was never sold in cans like IMR-4320 is. When IMR-4475 didn't meet US military velocity specs in 5.56 IMR-8208M was developed as an improvement to IMR-4475.

Back when surplus powder was really what it was labeled, and not some imported powder that just happens to be similar to US surplus powders, a friend bought both IMR-4475 and IMR-8208M to load 45-70. He said in 45-70 both surplus powder were hotter/faster than IMR-3031, but this was in a straight wall case which may not have the same results as a bottle neck case.

The stated 7.62x51 military ball loads show 41.0 grains of IMR-4475 and 41.5 grains of IMR-8208M. This would tend to show IMR-8208M as slightly slower than IMR-4475. I don't know if IMR-4475 is directly comparable to IMR-3031 as is often claimed.

The Federal 168 grain match load was originally developed by the Marine Corps rifle team. The original load was mild at 39.0 or 39.5 grains of IMR-3031 depending on the source of the information. Lyman's accuracy load at the time was 39.5 grains of IMR-3031 also. Federal was contracted to load the ammo for the Marine Corps rifle team and later to some government agencies. This load wasn't sold directly to the public and was called Federal "Match".

When federal decided to sell match ammunition to public it loaded it to SAAMI specs which was hotter than the original load. This was around 1990. A gun magazine writer wrote about the then new Federal "Gold Metal Match" ammunition. He wrote the same article for several different magazines. He described the powder as "looking like IMR-4064" without mention of charge weight. About that time it was becoming popular to change from IMR-4895 to IMR-4064 in match loads. The standard load was generally 42.0 grains of IMR-4064 in military cases with the 168 grain SMK. Around 1991 Fulton Armory ran large ads in Shotgun News selling the then new Federal Gold Match ammunition and stating it was loaded with the "popular match load of 42.0 grains of IMR-4064".

The first couple of boxes of Federal GMM I bought the powder weighed 41.1 grains. Later all boxes had a charge of 41.0 grains of powder. Maybe my scales were off a tenth the first time. I tried to copy the load. In commercial cases it took 43.0 grains of IMR-4064 to match the GMM for velocity. I then realized that Federal had taken the original IMR-3031 load and just increased the powder charge to meet SAAMI pressure limits. I went back to my preferred load of IMR-4895. The current 168 grain GMM appears to be 43.0 grains of RL-15. I haven't weighed the powder in the 175 grain GMM.

Before Sierra made the 175gr SMK it was popular for some shooters to use the 180gr SMK in matches because it worked better past 300 yards than the 168gr SMK. Later Sierra came out with the 175gr SMK as the heaviest bullet that would work in a 12 inch twist.

The original M118 LR load used a ball powder and standard LC cases and the original pressure limit was 50,000 CUP at 70 F but was tested in a standard military rifle test barrel and not the tighter match chambers in M21 rifles. It was found in high temps the pressure was too high for the M21/M14. BEFORE ATK took over Lake City operations many powders were tried and RL-15 was chosen. This didn't seem to have to do with what company had the contract for Lake City but I'm sure ATK had some good inside contacts.

With the powder change other "fixes" were also chosen. The gas system was modified. The chamber was changed to ease extraction. The case capacity was increased but the case web was strengthened to prevent case head separation. The chamber pressure was increased to SAAMI max for 308 Winchester. This caused a problem when the pressure limit was first decided and explains the early high powder change of RL-15. Instead of the "mean pressure" limit the average pressure limit was replaced with SAAMI single round absolute peak pressure limit. So instead of 52,000 CUP the pressure was increased to 55,300 CUP. The original load ATK stated was 44.3 grains of RL-15. Even with all of the changes the ammunition was still damaging M14 type rifle in high temps. The load was later decreased but still wasn't perfect.

I loaded some IMR-3031 in 6.5x55 one Summer. while shooting at the range from a bench with no cover the ammunition and the rifle got hot to the touch. I did notice the recoil increase and the point of impact change. One nice thing about IMR powders is they aren't very primer sensitive and slight changes in powder measures and case capacity don't affect loads as much with Hodgdon's H4895 and Varget.

Sometimes I will notice a "max" load when there is a lag in velocity increase compared to a charge increase (mostly with ball powders). But with IMR-3031 I have noticed a steady increase in velocity such as 50 fps per 0.5gr increase but when max load is reached the velocity is much greater such as jumping 120 fps for a 0.5gr increase. When this happens I know I've reached the max load for IMR-3031.

IMR-3031 makes barrels get really hot compared to some other powders. It's surprising that the British military accepted IMR-3031 (then Dupont 16) as a Cordite substitute in WWI. it may have been that it wasn't effected as much by heat as some other powders as this was an issue with pressure in the Enfield. Other American ammunition makers made 303 ammo for the British from 1914 to 1918 using other powders but IMR-3031 was the only one accepted as a Cordite substitute and may have the only other powder used after 1916.

Another note, the high pressure proof load is stated as the 172 (171.5gr) grain bullet with 41.0 grains of IMR-4475. Hopefully IMR-4475 is faster than IMR-3031 as my friend found it in 45-70.

Federal commercial cases are known to develop loose primer pockets. Some claim this is due to "soft brass" but I have found the Federal commercial to be thinner in the case head.

The current M118 LR cases have slightly larger capacity than LC M80 cases. Not as much as some lighter, large commercial cases but close to some of the heavier ones.

I wouldn't rule out IMR-4895 as the "new" powder. It is longer than Varget but not as long as IMR-3031 or IMR-4064. Since it's not in the list that is suppose to have the powder listed I guess it's not IMR-4895 but I don't think temp affects it as badly as some powders.

RL-15 is a double base powder. RL-15 is based on Nobel powders common in Europe and sold under different brand names such as Norma and a few others. Herters that became Scot powders were Nobel powders. Vihtavuori 500 series powders are double base powders but different from the Nobel powders. Vihtavuori recommends against using their 500 series powders in gas operated rifles and recommends using their 100 series powders for gas operated rifles.

When Winchester ran Lake City IMR-4895 was used in M852 and M118, so the company that has the contract to run the plant doesn't always stick to their own powders.
 
#162
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 1SMALLJOHNSON</div><div class="ubbcode-body">81,
Boy, you're doing some homework. Good job! I might suggest a few things, but you must follow some strict safety rules:

1- How cold is dry ice? Can you get the ammo down to either -20 or -65F? Plus 40 is really not a good data point to analyze velocity delta of temperature. A bigger temp spread would be better. IF you do this, load up a step charge, and begin firing the cold rounds and hot rounds with reduced charge weight. Watch for pressure problems at BOTH temperatures. That's the safe way of doing it.

2- I built a box from R-max insulation. Place it on the floor boards of the vehicle, positioned so that the heater blows on the rounds. Believe me, it gets hot.

3- Kestrel is good, but can you pick up a lazer thermometer, or borrow one? That might assist as well.

4- Regarding muzzle flash, see if you can standardize a distance from muzzle, and always set the camera up at the same elevation, distance and angle from the muzzle. That way, all your data will be consistent.

I only mention these things because you seem to be a guy who really digs this stuff.

</div></div>

1SMALLJONHSON,

Thank you for the excellent suggestions. However, you can save me a bunch of time and components if you just shake off the NDA and tell us what you know... smilin

Dry Ice might be a better option, though I do not know how cold it gets. Will find out more into it.

On alternating shots between chilled and heated, I think is a good idea. Yesterday I would have had a couple of data points on both temperature (though the delta is not wide enough as you pointed out)

On the laser thermometer, I will see if I can borrow one from our facilities mainenance people, they used the instrument as a predictive maintenance tool by checking high electrical load connections on periodic basis.

I have to think what is the best way to heat the ammo, the blanket made the ammo uncomfortable to the touch. I tried the heater route but the air was just blasting onto the ammo in the plastic box.

Yes, I intend to standardize the distance of the camera to the muzzle.

Thanks again.

What is your favorite malt, maybe I can just bribe you with one for the information, I may come out ahead money wise in the end.
 
#163
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lindy</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Before getting too far into temperature testing, it may be useful to read the two articles I've linked below, which address these issues, especially the second, which suggests significant effects from the temperature of the <span style="font-style: italic">barrel</span>.

It's a lot easier to get ammo to a desirable temperature for testing than it is a barrel - and if the barrel temperature is a significant factor in temperature sensitivity, varying the ammo temperature may give results that have limited applicability if the goal is to find out how the muzzle velocity changes as a function of the ambient temperature.

http://www.snipershide.com/UserFiles/Image/articles/Pressure_Factors.pdf

http://www.snipershide.com/UserFiles/Image/articles/powder_primer_temp_experiment_2.pdf


</div></div>

Lindy,

Thank you for the links. I will try to digest them later, have to pick up the geandkid.
 
#164
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Before Sierra made the 175gr SMK it was popular for some shooters to use the 180gr SMK in matches because it worked better past 300 yards than the 168gr SMK. Later Sierra came out with the 175gr SMK as the heaviest bullet that would work in a 12 inch twist.

The original M118 LR load used a ball powder and standard LC cases and the original pressure limit was 50,000 CUP at 70 F but was tested in a standard military rifle test barrel and not the tighter match chambers in M21 rifles. It was found in high temps the pressure was too high for the M21/M14. BEFORE ATK took over Lake City operations many powders were tried and RL-15 was chosen. This didn't seem to have to do with what company had the contract for Lake City but I'm sure ATK had some good inside contacts.</div></div>

You state these authoritatively -- what are your reference sources and documents, please?

The military teams used "Old" Sierra 180 Match Kings with a very long boat-tail to get the 7.62 to shoot to 1,000 yards out of 22-inch barreled M14s for the Camp Perry Long Range Championships (the older boat-tail is very similar to the 190 Match King and 180 Game King). They shortened the boat-tail and it doesn't work as well. It's challenging to get the right velocity/pressure when the rules state the rifle's gas system MUST function as designed (generally MUCH shorter than on comparable bolt action match rifles). The Marine Corps' "G4" load damaged brass so badly it wasn't reloadable.

The 175 SMK was designed to get Marine standard issue rifles (both the M40 and M14, and the Army's M24s by extension since it was a Marine Corps project/requirement) to 1,000 yards. There was no other standard ammo that could do that as the Lake City 173 bullet dies were getting tired and just plain worn out (168s will go wobbly around 850 yards).

You state the powder was changed due to damage to the M21/M14. I was told (by the Picatinny Project Officer) it was to bring the bullet trajectory to match the BDC on the USMC Unertl telescope. I'm sure if there was damage to ANY standard US military weapon system the Safety-of-Use memo would be plastered across DOD.

1SmallJohnson is a former US Olympic Shooting Team member and intimately familiar with the M118LR powders (the original WC750 and the newest powders for the Mark 316). He's a very modest dude who would never toot his own horn (sorry, K -- had to out ya!).

Nez, nice work! I used 3031 years ago, as well as 4895 and 4064 (all in M14s/M1As), but settled on Varget to simplify things for both 5.56 and 7.62.
 
#165
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

Sinister,

Thanks boss.

Come to Texas at the end of the October for our state service rifle championship. Or come visit during the hunting season I have access to a place in Webb County where we can hunt or just shoot in general.

I am heading to Benning for the 4th time to support the AMU/CMP program you are familiar with.

That guy 1SJ is keeping everyone in suspense as to what the load is for the new 118. I got wrappped up in the guessing game so I figure I might as well contribute to the chase. It is killing me that I could not get a whole day on the range to get meaningful data.
 
#167
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 81STFACP</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lindy</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Before getting too far into temperature testing, it may be useful to read the two articles I've linked below, which address these issues, especially the second, which suggests significant effects from the temperature of the <span style="font-style: italic">barrel</span>.

It's a lot easier to get ammo to a desirable temperature for testing than it is a barrel - and if the barrel temperature is a significant factor in temperature sensitivity, varying the ammo temperature may give results that have limited applicability if the goal is to find out how the muzzle velocity changes as a function of the ambient temperature.

http://www.snipershide.com/UserFiles/Image/articles/Pressure_Factors.pdf

http://www.snipershide.com/UserFiles/Image/articles/powder_primer_temp_experiment_2.pdf


</div></div>


Lindy,

Thank you for the links. I will try to digest them later, have to pick up the geandkid. </div></div>


Lindy,

Some interesting findings and deduction by the author.

Before I proceed with any further testing of the 3031 and velocity as affected by temperature I need to get more tools. Last might I just ordered a laser temperature meter to precisely measure surface temperature and I need to get a couple of cases of the dusters, and some 3031, the other stuff I have plenty of.

On my next trip I will have these in the matrix
1. Chamber/barrel temperature
2. Ammo temperature
3. Neck Tension
4. Powder Charge (range TBD)

Will chill the ammo and chamber with duster (probably need a case or two to complete the tests) to see how low of a temperature I can get down them to, and will maintain that temperature before each shot of the 3031 load.

Will heat the chamber barrel by firing rounds through it, will use the old M118 LR to raise the temperature (to what TBD), and will maintain that temperature before every shot of the 3031 load.

Will heat the ammo either by 1SJ's suggestion or blanket as I used before or combination thereof. The goal is to elevate the temperature to match the chamber/barrel temperature.

All rounds fired will have group and velocity information including the warm up loads.

This sounds like a lot of work, time, and components. Now Lindy here is the deal, I know you know somebody who knows somebody who knows somebody, how about a 21 Balvenie , a Royal Salute, or JW Blue to your door if you just get us the Federal load, then we can just close this thread....... smilin

Dr. K,

What do you think? Input?


 
#168
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">This sounds like a lot of work, time, and components. Now Lindy here is the deal, I know you know somebody who knows somebody who knows somebody, how about a 21 Balvenie , a Royal Salute, or JW Blue to your door if you just get us the Federal load, then we can just close this thread....... smilin</div></div>

I have a load which puts a 175 SMK out of the 24" barrel on my AI at a desirable velocity - about 2675 fps - with a powder which is relatively temperature stable (0.6 fps/F°, and shoots very well out of all of my rifles.

It's not a secret - 44.6 grains Varget, Lapua brass, Federal 210M primer, loaded to 2.810 COAL.

So, I'm a happy shooter, as is, with the load I'm using.

Thanks for the offer, though.
laugh.gif


And good luck with your research project. That's too many variables for me to keep track of, but I'm old...
 
#169
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

I think people often make things more complicated than they need to be, or should be. If you were doing all of this for some kind of official test for a customer such as the military or what not, then yes, things need to be very precise. Personally, I wouldn't go out and buy a bunch of things for this since this is being done only to satisfy curiosity.

As far as chamber temperature effects go, I think this is negligence IF you're letting the barrel cool completely between shots AND you're transferring the rounds from your cold/hot storage to the rifle and firing them RIGHT AWAY. This means not taking ANY time to aim beyond making sure that you're putting them through the chronograph. If its done quickly (and by quickly, I mean trying to be the Jerry Miculek of loading and firing a round from a boltgun through a chronograph) thermal conduction will be minimal.

What you're trying to do is quantify the thermal stability of the load alone, not that of the rifle and load as a system. The thermal expansion and contraction of the barrel will have its own effects on performance as will thermal transfers between the chamber and the case if you let the case sit in the chamber for any amount of time. And those will change for different rifles, barrels and chambers. De-couple those things from the experiment. Examine the the stability of the load itself, alone, keeping other factors as constant as possible. If you start changing the temperatures of the rifle and barrel, how do you know that a change in velocity came from the load and not from one or more of those factors being changed? To be scientific about it, you only change one variable at a time.
 
#170
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lindy</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
I have a load which puts a 175 SMK out of the 24" barrel on my AI at a desirable velocity - about 2675 fps - with a powder which is relatively temperature stable (0.6 fps/F°, and shoots very well out of all of my rifles.

It's not a secret - 44.6 grains Varget, Lapua brass, Federal 210M primer, loaded to 2.810 COAL.

So, I'm a happy shooter, as is, with the load I'm using.

Thanks for the offer, though.
laugh.gif


And good luck with your research project. That's too many variables for me to keep track of, but I'm old...
</div></div>

Lindy,

It is all Cory's fault, he threw a carrot out there what the new long range load is from Federal, then 1SmallJohnson added his "need to know" only basis knowledge, then all the speculations began.

All of us were all happy with out favorite loads, it is just the puzzle and curiosity. Oh well, I wish I did not talk my self out of retirement otherwise I would have been on the range every day on this project.

Thank you.
 
#171
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

Sinister,
Thanks for the kind words. I'm just an old has-been, really. Can't remember what I used to know, hair's turning grey, eyesite is shot, and can't hear anymore. There was a time when I could pull a trigger, but after the chainsaw mishap, my shooting hand will never be the same. Knees are shot, ankles don't work any more, and I'm stuck in corporate America, driving a desk. I guess that's why I like living vicariously thru you all. Just remember: It's not the triumph, it's the struggle. It's not the destination, but the journey. Enjoy working on this project. Use your brain, dedicate your time and enjoy! There may come a time when the powder is "outed" too. Come that day, we'll all sit back and look back on our wonderful time. In the mean time, we've got a whole slew of guys "figurin". That's a REALLY good thing. After all, most of the development in this shooting world came not by high office buildings and managers, but by back yard gunsmiths, tinkerers, and folks who bother to think, "What if....?"
 
#172
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

"It's surprising that the British military accepted IMR-3031 (then Dupont 16) as a Cordite substitute in WWI."

So much has changed in the powder world in the last 89 years, I wouldn't draw too many conclusions or be too surprised over anything that went on back then.

Reading the .gov's memos on the search for a suitable powder and charge for the M1 Garand, more than a decade (almost two) after the time described in that post, reveals that the powders available back then often had nasty flame temps resulting in rapid throat erosion, not to mention pressure spikes at just about the point where desired velocities were reached, and a host of other problems. They would have gone to 2950 fps or so with that 152-gr bullet if the powders would have let them. Compare THAT to a 55-gr at 3200 fps!
 
#173
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Emilio</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I loaded some up and they shoot great through my M40A1 clone. I have the data card and yes you can buy the powder over the counter, if you can find it. Hint, it the accuracy powder inthe Sierra load mannual from a few years back.
wink.gif
</div></div>

The accuracy load in my Sierra 3rd edition is IMR-4064, but 42grs for 2500fps
 
#175
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: marduk185</div><div class="ubbcode-body">i know ill be shooting 41.0 grains of imr4064 behind 175smk all day long if i do my part. </div></div>

That is way SLOW for 175SMK... and i doubt it can stay supersonic to 1k yds/meters.
 
#176
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: GuinnessNM</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Emilio</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I loaded some up and they shoot great through my M40A1 clone. I have the data card and yes you can buy the powder over the counter, if you can find it. Hint, it the accuracy powder inthe Sierra load mannual from a few years back.
wink.gif
</div></div>

The accuracy load in my Sierra 3rd edition is IMR-4064, but 42grs for 2500fps </div></div>

Try 42-43grs in GI brass
 
#177
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

maybe slow in your rifle but outta my 26 inch tight chamber beast it runs 2625-2640fps. plenty to get me out a ways and it prints tighter than faster loads i tried. my rig seems to like 2600ish even though i can push them much faster. m118lr races out at 2715 consistently but not as tight groups as my handloads.
 
#179
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

While it is interesting to speculate on the powder used for the MK316 mod0 cartridge, as Lindy says, there are many prescriptions which produce similar velocity and accuracy.

What I wonder about is the statement that the "Cartridge can be assembled on conventional high speed loading equipment". What exactly does this mean in terms of case preparation? Are cases sorted by weight? Are the new cases full length sized? Are flash holes deburred, case mouth chamfered, ... ? What really matters to produce what is apparently quite acceptable long-range ammo?
 
#180
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

I've have all of the components to try this now, the only thing I don't have at the moment is time.

IMR has released a new powder: http://accurateshooter.wordpress.com/2009/10/03/hodgdon-releases-impressive-new-imr-8208-xbr-powder/ However, it says that it is short grain...



<span style="font-style: italic">Re: other temperature stable loads exist, blah, blah, blah...</span>

1) Sorry, but those will exibit much more muzzle flash than what 81STFACP is showing in his video. Low muzzle flash was also a goal listed in that presentation.

2) This may prove to be a very useful experiment as far as showing that magnum primers can significantly improve temperature stability in some powders.

3) Who cares? This is fun!...
 
#181
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: kombayotch</div><div class="ubbcode-body">This is fun!... </div></div>

This is all this matters!!!

At the end, many may just go back to their try and work load that their one gun like, that's good and fine... this exercise is all about reverse engineering and FUN....
 
#182
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

I just finished some load development today, and settled on charge weights for my rifle and both 175-gr and 155-gr bullets.

For both, 4064 won out. Groups with Varget NEVER got better than 1.5 MOA, and that was going from pretty low up to too hot. Varget groups tightened up towards the top end, but pressure signs appeared AND velocities were 150-200 fps faster than expected for my 22-inch barrel.

Interestingly, the last three loads tested with 175s, with both powders, were almost identical in velocity. It was 3 shots of each set, three sets weighed at intervals of 0.4 grains of powder, and the entire 18-shot string had an extreme velocity spread of 49 fps! 2690 fps avg.
 
#184
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

Looks like the middle of the node is 41.6. Note that the small-sample velocity went DOWN by 6.1 fps when going up to 41.9 grains. This is well within the shot-to-shot variation "noise" to be expected when the sample size goes up to 10 or 20 or 30.

FA63M brass, reloaded 1x before this*, trimmed to 2.05 or a bit less, flash holes uniformed with the Sinclair tool
WLR primers
OAL 2.82-3, normal meplat variations
Sierra 175 SMKs
This batch, I cleaned all case lube out of the neck with a Q-tip.
RCBS X-Die, FL sized to middle of range per Wilson gage.
Wal*Mart buttery flavor spray oil for case lube (everyone's OUT of everything right now)
Checker carb cleaner to degrease cases after loading.
Charges thrown from Dillon measure, trickled up and to within +/- .03 grain on Redding balance beam scales (I run two).
Lee seater die, set to NOT crimp.
Run single-stage style through Dillon 550.
Cheap Wal*Mart black folding stool for butt-comfort.

Enough details?

Fired at about 3400 ASL, 70-75°F, humidity somewhere less than 30%, and I don't pay attention to barometric pressure and can't measure it anyway. Look up weather.com for Gunlock, Utah on last Tuesday at noon for the nearest reading if you want.

Only 3 shots as OCW testing...

Charges were:

41.6
avg. vel 2669.8
sd (of n-1 version) 0.35
es 0.6 (yes, 0.6! Don't get too worked up, it's a small sample)

41.9
avg. vel 2663.7
sd (of n-1 version)5.87
es 8.3

42.2
avg. vel 2697.6
sd (of n-1 version) 5.86
es 14.3

With the scope mount and all that USGI old-fashioned stock geometry, this rifle at 100 yards puts faster loads' impacts DOWN on the target, at least at the full-power loads I've tested with bullets from 147 to 175 grains.

I may re-test with 41.3 or 41.2 and 41.7, to refine the boundaries of the node. If they all hit the same AND have a narrow enough velocity range from 41.2 to 41.7, I could get away with thrown charges from the Dillon = no weighing charges, if I take some steps to eliminate the occasional way-heavy thrown charge.

*When one of my tired cases lets go, the impact goes usually straight up about 1.75 MOA. Velocities drop 50-100 fps during those events. More diligent inspection next time around. On the first reload, I was using the "traditional" FL resizing routine, and those cases were at or just a bit shorter than absolute ammo minimum according to the Wilson gage. Fired cases were .010 longer than the unfired cases...
 
#185
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

Hey, is ADI 2219 available in the U.S. under any name from any label?

Youse guys in Oz, how about giving us some descriptions of ADI 2219, kernel size compared to Varget or whatever...AND any shooting results with 175s in the .30 calibers?
 
#186
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Grump</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Hey, is ADI 2219 available in the U.S. under any name from any label?

Youse guys in Oz, how about giving us some descriptions of ADI 2219, kernel size compared to Varget or whatever...AND any shooting results with 175s in the .30 calibers? </div></div>

Grump:

I knew I had this baby somewhere.

http://www.adi-limited.com/handloaders-guide/equivalents.asp

It looks like ADI2219 is equavalent to H322.
 
#187
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">http://www.adi-limited.com/handloaders%2Dguide/equivalents.asp</div></div>

Now THAT'S a darned handy reference!
 
#188
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BHP9</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Grump</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Hey, is ADI 2219 available in the U.S. under any name from any label?

Youse guys in Oz, how about giving us some descriptions of ADI 2219, kernel size compared to Varget or whatever...AND any shooting results with 175s in the .30 calibers? </div></div>

Grump:

I knew I had this baby somewhere.

http://www.adi-limited.com/handloaders-guide/equivalents.asp

It looks like ADI2219 is equavalent to H322.</div></div>

Hmmm... a STRATIFIED burn rate chart, rather than ordinal. The succession of bands, however, appears to be ordinal like we are accustomed to seeing.

Right next door to 3031, traditionally thought to be the fastest one suitable for loading in the M1 Garand with its unregulated long-stroke piston system.

If I read the caveats correctly, the variance inside each band can be 5%, perhaps in the form of +/- 2.5%. Whether the differences between bands are at "contact distance" or can be a gap, who knows? Thinking "percentage faster" is quite the imprecise concept anyway, not taking into account the burn curve and differing performance elements at different pressures.
 
#189
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

I'm going to vote for 4064 as the mystery powder in the new M118LR load. Found the following post from April 2008 on Benchrest.com:

"I think 41.5 of 4064 is also Sierra's accuracy load for the 175 SMK."

http://www.benchrest.com/forums/showthread.php?t=51056

I wouldn't be surprised if there was some change to the mix that would increase its temp/velocity stability, and maybe even reduce muzzle flash. I've heard reports of such changes being possible without altering the original burn rate--whether other adjustments are needed to keep it neutral is unknown.
 
#190
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

This is a quote about the new MK 248 Mod1 300 Win Mag round that was developed.

This information came from this link:

https://www.neco.navy.mil/upload/N00164/N0016409RJN30000209RJN30_0002_att.pdf It is safe to click.

Quote:

"(3.4.4 Propellant. (C2) [Each cartridge shall contain Hodgdon H1000 propellant.] The propellant loaded in this cartridge shall
contain flash reduction additives or coatings, and shall meet the
temperature stability and ballistic requirements detailed in
Section 3.6.)"

Apparently the additives or coating for flash reduction and temperature stability could have been applied to the powder for the M118LR load as well. Therefor opening the door for other powder possibilities. I still vote for a modified IMR 4064.

There is a lot more detailed information in the article. Including the process used for testing.
 
#191
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

Any idea whether this stuff for WMag loads is the same for 7.62x51????:

"contain flash reduction additives or coatings, and shall meet the
temperature stability and ballistic requirements detailed in
Section 3.6."

The stability and ballistic requirements might be identical, save for the velocity. Not sure that the same additives or coatings would work in the smaller combustion chamber of the M40's round.

I also believe that H1000 would require a very heavy charge weight to do it in our little rifles.
 
#192
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

First of all, I am not an expert in this field. Just tying to fill in the gaps of information. (Which is probably a big mistake)

If the same coatings or additives did not work for both types of powders and relative case volumes, I would bet that “they” would be able to develop a coating/additive that would work for each system. Bottom line is that we are not getting the powder with the coating/additive off the shelf. And with out that, we may have to settle for duplicating as close as possible. If that is the goal at hand?

The upside to this is that the guys in the field that are using this new ammo will have a great performing round at their disposal. And if the flash suppression additives/coatings make a difference in weather they make it through the mission or not, then somebody did their job correctly!
 
#193
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

H1000 is way, way, waaaaaaaaaaay (did I mention way?) too slow for 308 Win. You could not pack enough powder into the case to get the velocity anywhere near 2650 fps. The flash suppression comes from having a complete powder burn before the bullet exits. You want a fast burning powder for that. H1000 would be going in the wrong direction for that, big time. And a coating isn't going to change that.

ADI2219 is the right burn rate, but not available here...

I think the hints and comments from those who took part in the development are telling us that we are on the right track with with IMR3031. I have a bunch of rounds leaded up with it. Just need to find the damned time to actually test them.
 
#194
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

All of my upcoming weekends are shot, but I just got permission from the owner of the range to shoot after dark. So, I'm heading over... Let the good times roll!
 
#195
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

No where have I suggested that the powder is H1000. I am sure it is not H1000. And I know that you think that it is 3031. I am aware of burn rates and what powders are appropriate for what cartridges.

I will start by saying this, very few people on this site or anywhere know what powder is used unless they have seen the data card, or been involved with the development some how.

What I have suggested is this, that the powder that is being used is modified. Be it 3031, 4064 or IMR 6969 pixie dust, it is being changed by the folks that make it.





 
#196
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

Here is what I got in my 26" Bartlein 5R with about 6500 rounds on it. The velocities are lower than expected. However, my 190 SMK load was also running slow. I double checked the velocities on a second CED chronograph and they were the same. I will need to look into that further...

The freezer in the clubhouse was used for cooling and a heating pad in a small cooler for heating. I let the rounds soak for over an hour. I'm going to re-check the temperatures with a thermo-couple tomorrow, but I think they are pretty good. Used a mercury based lab thermometer to take the measurements.

175_IMR3031.jpg

(5 round averages)

Trend lines says 66 fps. change between 0F and 100F. I may have gotten them too hot though. That heating pad will actually burn you on the highest setting. If I apply the trend line based on -4F to 49F only, there is only a 36 fps change (calculated) going from 0F to 100F.

 
#197
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: kombayotch</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Here is what I got in my 26" Bartlein 5R with about 6500 rounds on it. The velocities are lower than expected. However, my 190 SMK load was also running slow. I double checked the velocities on a second CED chronograph and they were the same. I will need to look into that further...
</div></div>

Thank you for the continuing the work.

What is the percentage change in your 190 SMK velocity?
 
#198
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

The average was about 45 fps. lower than usual, which is not typical. Its a Varget load and the powder is from the same lot I have been shooting for ages. Its been a while since I've chronographed that load, so it may be due to barrel wear.

Here is what the Varget load did over temperature. Looks like the non-magnum primers take a dump in freezing temperatures, so I would go by top end with this one. I had placed the rounds on top of the heating pad instead of inside it, so these didn't get as hot as the rounds above, at the top end.

<span style="font-weight: bold">***new data posted***</span>

I'm going to have to repeat this with some magnum primers to see if it helps.

Here is a video of the muzzle flash. Six shots, alternating between the 190 Varget load and the 175 IMR3031 load. Starts with the the 190 load.

http://s23.photobucket.com/albums/b356/k...nt=P1050164.flv

That charge weight of Varget with 190's burns completely. You can see a few sparks with the 175 load. That Federal presentation mentioned that with competitor's primers. This load really needs to be tried with 215M primers.
 
#200
Re: New M118LR loading from Federal

You guys make this too complicated!

For a factory BBL - and your mileage may vary,

45.0 Varget
Fed 210M
SMK 175
Black HIlls Winchester brass.

2710fps.

It chronoed EXACTLY the same as M118LR did on the same day, with the same rifle.


It works, so I never changed it.
 
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