OCW / Satterlee Test Results

[Gregor.Samsa]

Gents,

I wanted to compare Hornady 140 ELDMs to the 140 Berger Hybrids I previously tested.

Powder is RL16
215M primers (all LGS had)
brass is 1x fired Hornady, FL sized, trimmed, 0.002" neck tension, 0.002" shoulder bump
CBTO 2.255"
COAL 2.875"
0.085" jump

I think my rifle likes these pretty well. I shot the test round Robin, a little pressed for time. By far the best SD and grouping I got was at the upper end of the charge weight. My consternation is that i also experienced slightly sticky bolt lift. No obvious pressure signs in the brass or primers but I'm not the best judge. Should I continue to develop this hot load or explore the other charges. I'm new to reloading so I don't exactly trust my interpretation.

Thank you

 

[Gregor.Samsa]

Forgot to mention: Tikka CTR 6.5CM

Charge Weight / Velocities x3 tests / SD / ES

39.9 / 2680, 2608, 2610 / 5.3 / 10
41.2 / 2664, 2704, 2709 / 24.7 / 45
41.5 / 2717, 2716, 2694 / 13 / 23
41.8 / 2770, 2744, 2719 / 25.5 / 51
42.1 / 2780, 2761, 2746 / 22.1 / 44
42.4 / 2759, 2763, 2778 / 10 / 19
42.7 / 2781, 2795, 2792 / 7.4 / 14
43.0 / 2826, 2815, 2816 / 6.1 / 11
43.3 / 2845, 2833, 2818 / 13.5 / 27
43.6 / 2840, 2847, 2844 / 3.5 / 7

 

[Gregor.Samsa]

Groups shot round robin not consecutively

 

[Dthomas3523]

Sticky bolt is a for sure sign of pressure if everything is sized correctly. What charge weight did that start at?

Just looking at your data, I’d do a seating depth test on 42.7. Find optimal seating depth node and load on the long side of it to account for throat erosion. Then I’d take that seating depth and load +/- .1 grain increments out to .5grain either size and narrow that node down a bit.

42.4 42.7 43.0 was the only area where your ES leveled out and was consistent.

I’m assuming you’re not weight charges on something like an fx120 with your ES’s being all over the place?

 

[Gregor.Samsa]

Thank you for the analysis! I’ll explore seating depth variations and powder charges in that range. Charges were weighed on an old RCBS 505 scale. I tried my best to take my time and weigh as accurately as possible to the point of using tweezers to add / remove powder kernels. I definitely see a charge master etc. in my future but want to nail the fundamentals first. Sticky bolt became evident around 43.3.

 

[Ryridesmotox]

Dont worry about getting a chargemaster yet. I still do workups with a beam scale since its very accurate. I wouldnt mind a lab balance like a fx120 for speed and accuracy. But my old dillon ohaus has been rock solid for over 10 years. If you set it up and zero it properly, it will give you more consistent powder charge weight than much of the entry bbn level trickles.

I will find my node where I can have a couple tenths variance in powder, and then I'll use my intellidropper.

In your case I would send it with 42.7 and maybe play with seating depth or neck tension. Also, might want to go to a non magnum primer. Sometimes that can change the pressure curve enough to give me premature pressure signs.

 

[Gregor.Samsa]

Yeah, I have no immediate plans to upgrade equipment. I don’t want to throw money at issues related to my reloading or shooting until I can rule out my skill level as the limiting factor. I think I might build a platform of sorts for the scale as I have to crane my neck down to align the markings. There may be some sort of parallax effect to the way I’m reading it. Thanks

 

[Dthomas3523]

Yep, I’d run with the seating depth test at 42.7. Start at .005 off and move back .003 at a time until around .040 off lands. The seating depth node should show up easily in groups.

Then do .1 grain increments from 42.2 to 43.0 (since you saw heavy bolt, I wouldn’t much higher). And see where the node inside that node is. Then be done with it.

 

[Gregor.Samsa]

This is great advice. Much appreciated.

 

[TRG65]

I second the recommendation to try a non-magnum primer. Even with magnum rounds, magnum primers haven't given me as good of SDs and ESs as regular primers. I don't hunt or shoot in truly frigid weather, only in teens (at most) and twenties, and haven't had an ignition issue.

I would also recommend you don't do a .3 grain jump. Now that you have some baseline data do the steps in .2 or .1 grain differences.

My 6.5s have like the 147 ELDs at about .050 jump.

2780-2830 is where almost all my 140 loads found a node, most between 2810 and 2830, from a 24" barrel

 

[Gregor.Samsa]

I second the recommendation to try a non-magnum primer. Even with magnum rounds, magnum primers haven't given me as good of SDs and ESs as regular primers. I don't hunt or shoot in truly frigid weather, only in teens (at most) and twenties, and haven't had an ignition issue.

I would also recommend you don't do a .3 grain jump. Now that you have some baseline data do the steps in .2 or .1 grain differences.

My 6.5s have like the 147 ELDs at about .050 jump.

2780-2830 is where almost all my 140 loads found a node, most between 2810 and 2830, from a 24" barrel

Thank you. Would swapping to regular primer require working this test again or is there a a standard adjustment to the powder charge to compensate for the swap?

 

[Steel head]

Thank you. Would swapping to regular primer require working this test again or is there a a standard adjustment to the powder charge to compensate for the swap?

I don’t even run magnum primers in my magnum.
42.7 area looks interesting, might go to 43ish with regular primers
That’s good speed for a tikka barrel.

 

[Dthomas3523]

Thank you. Would swapping to regular primer require working this test again or is there a a standard adjustment to the powder charge to compensate for the swap?

I test primers separately. And just with chrono.

10 shots. .2gr increments, covering 2gr total.

do that for each primer you want to test. 0.020 off lands.

Pick primer with the lowest ES for the 10 shots. Unless one primer has a really noticeable node that would imply it’s more stable.

Don’t even look at groups.

 

[Deleted member 113831]

42.4 and do seating test in .005" increments. JMO

 

[oldfatguy]

Put my RCBS on an eye level platform and that really helped. Finally got the FX120 with trickler & auto throw. Weighs to +/- one kernel or dead on. ES & SD better with the FX VS 505.

Good advice on seating depth and primer testing. Consistent brass prep helps too.
OFG

 

[Gregor.Samsa]

Thanks everyone for the advice. With regards to seating depth testing. Confirming I should be seating closer to the lands in 0.005” increments correct? How many rounds do you suggest loading at each seating depth.

My chamber and throat are pretty long in this rifle. I think the closest I can get to the lands is 0.040ish and still fit in the magazine.

 

[Dthomas3523]

Thanks everyone for the advice. With regards to seating depth testing. Confirming I should be seating closer to the lands in 0.005” increments correct? How many rounds do you suggest loading at each seating depth.

My chamber and throat are pretty long in this rifle. I think the closest I can get to the lands is 0.040ish and still fit in the magazine.

That would be a pretty long damn chamber.

I start .005 off the lands and do .003 increments to about .038 off. 3 shot groups

 

[drn1234]

Thank you. Would swapping to regular primer require working this test again or is there a a standard adjustment to the powder charge to compensate for the swap?

Yes anytime you make a change lol that rerun

 

[Mainer]

What is the reason that the 42.7 load caught people's attention? Is it because it is in the middle of a group of three low SD/ES loads?

 

[Dthomas3523]

What is the reason that the 42.7 load caught people's attention? Is it because it is in the middle of a group of three low SD/ES loads?

Yes. Load stability.

You can tune your group size down pretty tight through seating depth. Most incorrectly just pick something like .010 .020 or .030 jump and then try to tune the load to that. That is backwards.

SD/ES is controlled via brass prep and charge weight. Group size is controlled via seating depth.

Find your charge nodes, the do seating depth tests in the middle of those nodes.

 

[Dthomas3523]

What is the reason that the 42.7 load caught people's attention? Is it because it is in the middle of a group of three low SD/ES loads?

Ever heard someone say something like “man, my rifle was shooting awesome back home. I went to (insert location) and it shot terrible”?

That’s what happens when you pick a group size first and end either not in a stable node or the far end of a node. Works great until you go somewhere with different environment and it throws you out of the node.

 

[DellaDog]

SD/ES is controlled via brass prep and charge weight. Group size is controlled via seating depth.

I read this alot, but wonder how this applies with Hybrid bullets that Litz says are seating depth agnostic. In fact, he says just seat them at -015 and don’t worry about chasing the lands. I’ve yet to find seating depth make all that much difference shooting 75 ELDM, 105, 109 and 140 hybrids.

I shoot an OCW, pick a node and find seating depth changes rarely make any difference.

 

[Dthomas3523]

I read this alot, but wonder how this applies with Hybrid bullets that Litz says are seating depth agnostic. In fact, he says just seat them at -015 and don’t worry about chasing the lands. I’ve yet to find seating depth make all that much difference shooting 75 ELDM, 105, 109 and 140 hybrids.

I shoot an OCW, pick a node and find seating depth changes rarely make any difference.

For prs, probably fine to just pick a middle node somewhere with not too much seating tests.

But you won’t find many F class and such not doing seating depth tests with any type of bullet.

My goal is to make the best ammo possible. Otherwise I’d just run 6cm with hornady 108’s and be done with it. So I tend to look at the disciplines like F class for loading examples and advice.

 

[DellaDog]

My goal is to make the best ammo possible. Otherwise I’d just run 6cm with hornady 108’s and be done with it. So I tend to look at the disciplines like F class for loading examples and advice.

My goal too. In fact, I‘ve always messed with seating depth to tighten groups - it’s just I rarely see much difference. Most everything i shoot, I eventually end up in .the 2s - .3s. I chase the seating depth to get smaller & have yet to really find anything.

It’s probably me.

 

[Steel head]

Ever heard someone say something like “man, my rifle was shooting awesome back home. I went to (insert location) and it shot terrible”?

That’s what happens when you pick a group size first and end either not in a stable node or the far end of a node. Works great until you go somewhere with different environment and it throws you out of the node.

THIS!
If you shoot in different locations and weather conditions being in a stable node is very important.
It prevents “it shot great at home” syndrome.

I’d take a 1 moa load in a node with decent ES over a touchy 1/4 moa load all day and twice on Sunday

 

[scissorhands]

First picture, my OCW test, I picked 41gn as my load(H4350). Second pic, Testing seating depths.

 

[Rocketmandb]

I don’t even run magnum primers in my magnum.
42.7 area looks interesting, might go to 43ish with regular primers

Agree with this. I use BR2s in my 300 and BR4s for my SRP stuff. If you're shooting in freezing temps, then a magnum primer might be warranted. Fortunately for me, I never have to do that

 

[Dthomas3523]

First picture, my OCW test, I picked 41gn as my load(H4350). Second pic, Testing seating depths. View attachment 7263960

Why 41.0 specifically? 40.6-41.2 all had close to the same center. Could even be argued down to 40.3 were close enough.

What was the ES on each charge weight?

 

[KYpatriot]

I read this alot, but wonder how this applies with Hybrid bullets that Litz says are seating depth agnostic. In fact, he says just seat them at -015 and don’t worry about chasing the lands. I’ve yet to find seating depth make all that much difference shooting 75 ELDM, 105, 109 and 140 hybrids.

I shoot an OCW, pick a node and find seating depth changes rarely make any difference.

I agree. Hybrids or tangent profiles like the smk dont seem to care much about jump. I think that was more of a pure vld, secant profile thing.

 

[scissorhands]

Why 41.0 specifically? 40.6-41.2 all had close to the same center. Could even be argued down to 40.3 were close enough.

What was the ES on each charge weight?

Why? couldn't tell you, I agree it could have gone either way. Have yet to chronograph the loads. Saving my pennies.

 

[kthomas]

I read this alot, but wonder how this applies with Hybrid bullets that Litz says are seating depth agnostic. In fact, he says just seat them at -015 and don’t worry about chasing the lands. I’ve yet to find seating depth make all that much difference shooting 75 ELDM, 105, 109 and 140 hybrids.

I shoot an OCW, pick a node and find seating depth changes rarely make any difference.

I shoot Berger Hybrids in 6mm, 6.5mm and .30 cal.

I've found those bullets love to be seated from 5 thou to 20 thou off the lands. Anywhere in there should shoot pretty damn well. I haven't found the need to chase the lands with these bullets.

Like others, I do bullet seating depth tests because it's a necessary step to optimize precision. Bullet seating depths for precision, velocity and powder charge tests for SD/ES.

 

[Gregor.Samsa]

Agree with this. I use BR2s in my 300 and BR4s for my SRP stuff. If you're shooting in freezing temps, then a magnum primer might be warranted. Fortunately for me, I never have to do that

yeah, I fuicked up and got impatient and bought Magnum primers as that was all that was available. feel like i should start all over.

 

[Rocketmandb]

yeah, I fuicked up and got impatient and bought Magnum primers as that was all that was available. feel like i should start all over.

Honestly, it's not a fuck up. It's one way to go vs another. I have 215Ms for my 300 as well - I just found the BR2s to be more consistent.

By the way, that 40.9 gr group is pretty good, minus the flyer. But many times when you see a group like that with one outlier, it's the shooter responsible for the outlier, not the load. Then your .005 and .015 seating depths are both very good as well. We're it me, I'd load up 20+ rounds of each and validate.

EDIT: Keep the 205Ms for now. You got a good group with the load test, then good groups at two seating depths using the same load. One more validation with a decent sample size will tell you whether it's real or not.

 

[Gregor.Samsa]

Honestly, it's not a fuck up. It's one way to go vs another. I have 215Ms for my 300 as well - I just found the BR2s to be more consistent.

By the way, that 40.9 gr group is pretty good, minus the flyer. But many times when you see a group like that with one outlier, it's the shooter responsible for the outlier, not the load. Then your .005 and .015 seating depths are both very good as well. We're it me, I'd load up 20+ rounds of each and validate.

EDIT: Keep the 205Ms for now. You got a good group with the load test, then good groups at two seating depths using the same load. One more validation with a decent sample size will tell you whether it's real or not.

Thanks. I’ll post up results of the seating depth test when I can get out again.

 

[I SHOOT]

For prs, probably fine to just pick a middle node somewhere with not too much seating tests.

But you won’t find many F class and such not doing seating depth tests with any type of bullet.

My goal is to make the best ammo possible. Otherwise I’d just run 6cm with hornady 108’s and be done with it. So I tend to look at the disciplines like F class for loading examples and advice.

Your correct f-class shooters are about as OCD as it gets about reloading just below BR guys!!

 

[Dthomas3523]

Your correct f-class shooters are about as OCD as it gets about reloading just below BR guys!!

Yep. That’s why when it comes to loading “perfect” ammo I take advice from people with an F class or Benchrest background (even if they shoot prs now or mix it in).

And I take advice on ffp optics, building stable positions, shooting supported, etc etc from PRS shooters.