Problems reloading precision ammo with Hornady 75gr BTHP

[Near miss]

I have tried to get the Hornady 75gr BTHP to play along with my MR223 but all my efforts have been futile.

So far my attempts have consisted of
Materials:
2 cases, Sako and Geco.
3 primers, 450, 400 and Ginex
Only N540 powder, I have settled to that and have it stacked.

Reloading changes:
Powder charges of 23.9, 24.4, 24.7, 25.0 and 25.2.
COALs of 2.230, 2.250 and 2.26.

I am now waiting to get to the range to test my latest reloads with 25.2gr and COAL of 2.271, 2.286, 2.296 and 2.305.

Obviously this is grabbing on straws since 3 of 4 of above load lengths are over any mag length.

I did notice that my barrel is shot enough that I cannot reach the lands anymore, after trying with shorter lengths I carefully fed a crimped case with a bullet seated at 2.559 and it returned with length of 2.551 without any marks.

My scenar 77gr loads are still hammering without any problems and even PMC and Geco bulk do better than my handloads with the 75gr.

Is my barrel so shot that I cannot get the Hornadys to run with it anymore? Just surprising how the contrast between scenars and them is so stark. I switched to 75s because one distributor got tons of them while scenars are hard to find and cost 43% more.

The scenars do nearly 1moa while hornady does around 2moa. Bulk is between with 1.4-1.6moa.
So far the SMALLEST group of 14 groups with hornadys has been 1.5moa.

I am waiting for a spare barrel to arrive but it might take some time and have not seen any reason to replace it just yet.


-----EDIT 26 SEP 2024 added to both first and last post----

I have already shot 2k of Hornady BTHP from my Lothar barrel and sub moa 5 round groups are the norm at my 300m range. This is with

I ordered 3k or 4k more already.

I tested both N140 and N540 and while N140 gave better groups with fresh barrel with clear mean radius win, I later tested both again just to see how they compare and N540 did so good that I chose to load with it.

My current load is:
PMC brass, uncleaned, nylon brushed neck
Ginex SRP primer
Hornady 75gr BTHP at 2.28", I noticed my accuracy improved a lot the longer I loaded them and this was the longest I got to fit in pmag with the grooves made in them.
N540 24.4gr
16" Lothar barrel, 2740fps, 14fps mean SD from multiple sessions

I have now shot these twice out to 1200yds and few times at 770yds and the Kestrel with G7 value of 0.180 has held up very well. I added some pictures to my last post too, but basically this round has incredible performance for value!

I tried this load with 2.28" and 2.25" COAL in a LMT and it ran around 1.5" with the shorter COAL running better, so I guess that this COAL preference is specific to just my gun.

 

[morning would]

When I look around the web, you and I aren’t the only ones that can’t get these to shoot. Sure, I see some people with some magical loads for these. But I also see quite a few that can’t get them to shoot. They seem pretty picky. As a new reloader, they have been the most frustrating bullet I’ve tried in any caliber.

 

[BuildingConceptsllc]

They work great for me but I use TAC with them.

 

[Yondering]

I have tried to get the Hornady 75gr BTHP to play along with my MR223 but all my efforts have been futile.

So far my attempts have consisted of
Materials:
2 cases, Sako and Geco.
3 primers, 450, 400 and Ginex
Only N540 powder, I have settled to that and have it stacked.

Reloading changes:
Powder charges of 23.9, 24.4, 24.7, 25.0 and 25.2.
COALs of 2.230, 2.250 and 2.26.

I am now waiting to get to the range to test my latest reloads with 25.2gr and COAL of 2.271, 2.286, 2.296 and 2.305.

Obviously this is grabbing on straws since 3 of 4 of above load lengths are over any mag length.

I did notice that my barrel is shot enough that I cannot reach the lands anymore, after trying with shorter lengths I carefully fed a crimped case with a bullet seated at 2.559 and it returned with length of 2.551 without any marks.

My scenar 77gr loads are still hammering without any problems and even PMC and Geco bulk do better than my handloads with the 75gr.

Is my barrel so shot that I cannot get the Hornadys to run with it anymore? Just surprising how the contrast between scenars and them is so stark. I switched to 75s because one distributor got tons of them while scenars are hard to find and cost 43% more.

The scenars do nearly 1moa while hornady does around 2moa. Bulk is between with 1.4-1.6moa.
So far the SMALLEST group of 14 groups with hornadys has been 1.5moa.

I am waiting for a spare barrel to arrive but it might take some time and have not seen any reason to replace it just yet.

I don't know what chamber your rifle has, but the common 5.56 chambers all have pretty long throats, it's no surprise you can't touch the lands. That's normal for 5.56 ammo and chambers in ARs. Stick to mag length loads or shorter; work with what you have that'll actually function and forget the stuff that you know won't fit. Don't be afraid to test loads a lot shorter, even down to 2.200" or so.

Seems like you've chosen a powder before discovering if it'd shoot well in your rifle - I'd say that's a mistake. There are some common well-established accuracy loads with this 75 BTHP bullet, but I don't think I've ever seen one with that powder.

At minimum you'll want to try some other powders. Starting with a well known accuracy load would save you a lot of trouble. I saw 8208 XBR for sale not long ago for example, and bought some more for my own use. 23.2-23.5gr of 8208 with that bullet at mag length shoots well in a lot of rifles.

Also, try some other primers. In my personal AR15 accuracy load with this bullet (one of my most consistent accuracy loads in any of my rifles), using the S&B SR primer is the bomb and always shoots well. The exact same load with CCI 400 or 450 primers shoots like hot garbage. For whatever reason, the primer change makes more difference in that load than anything else I've tried. Too bad those primers are unobtainable now...

 

[Near miss]

I live in Finland so VV powders are pretty much my only options. Other is Alliance powders but have not seen them in stock. Their future availability is also quite uncertain.

I could try using the few ounces of N140 that I left.

Testing seating depth even further down is probably a good idea. Going to try that before scrapping them.

Tbh having gone this far my expectations for success are quite low but finding an accurate node would be quite nice. And I preferably want a load that does not require any fiddling or special sauces.

 

[Yondering]

I live in Finland so VV powders are pretty much my only options.

Then try the other available VV powders that are appropriate. The point is that you have to try more options than what you've posted. What you've tried obviously isn't working, so make some changes.

 

[cruze5]

it seems all i buy is VV powders. and they are almost twice what i pay for other powders.
N140 seems to be the go to load for both of my 223 caliber bolt guns
i wrote down in my notes 25.4 grains of n140 shot good in both with a 69 SMK
24.1 shot good for a 77Nosler projectile, loading both to sami OAL

 

[Near miss]

I have read that for 223 70gr+, the 140 and 540 are the best options. But I could try N530.

I have shot berger VLDs which are also secant and they performed similar to scenar 69 and 77s.

Thanks for waking me up, I was already settled to N540 with my scenars and did not really even think about testing another powder.

 

[Near miss]

it seems all i buy is VV powders. and they are almost twice what i pay for other powders.
N140 seems to be the go to load for both of my 223 caliber bolt guns
i wrote down in my notes 25.4 grains of n140 shot good in both with a 69 SMK
24.1 shot good for a 77Nosler projectile, loading both to sami OAL

So far with scenars I have not even had to test different powder charges much at all, just test for pressure signs and load below that minding the max ambient temp.

N140 was maybe a bit more accurate but I have been well satisfied with N540.

 

[Trailgomer]

Been using 24.1gr N140 and 75bthp for years. Shoots good in 2 AR's and bolt gun. 24.1 gr N140 listed in Sierra data as THE accuracy load for 77 gr bthp. We shoot to 500 yds with excellent results. Try seating those 75bthp to 2.235-40 coal. Good luck!

 

[wvfarrier]

That projectile (at least for me) runs really well with Ramshot Tac

 

[M4orturnate]

Just a few things you may want to try. First dont ever crimp a round you want to shoot precision with. Its close to impossible to keep consistent. Use a expander mandrel to set neck tension. Find a generic charge with low sd and test seating depth in .003-.005 increments. 223/556 seems to shoot best for me close to max pressures. Also not saying its you but ARs are much harder to shoot precisely then bolt guns ime
Edit idk why i assumed this was for a ar15. Maybe its because its a popular choice here. Out of a bolt gun those didnt do well for me after about 400y. The elds hammered tho to 1200

 

[Near miss]

Just a few things you may want to try. First dont ever crimp a round you want to shoot precision with. Its close to impossible to keep consistent. Use a expander mandrel to set neck tension. Find a generic charge with low sd and test seating depth in .003-.005 increments. 223/556 seems to shoot best for me close to max pressures. Also not saying its you but ARs are much harder to shoot precisely then bolt guns ime
Edit idk why i assumed this was for a ar15. Maybe its because its a popular choice here. Out of a bolt gun those didnt do well for me after about 400y. The elds hammered tho to 1200

Thanks.

The crimp was just to get fine pressure on the case neck to test the max COAL. I do not crimp, though tested it with berger vlds and did not get clearly worse grouping. Just unnecessary work.

I have not started to use an expander mandrel, I have found that for my precision needs (0.8moa average 5 shot groups) are well possible with the redding NC die. Mainly it is my shooting or wind that causes dispersion.

I thought of trying widely different seating depths to see if I get any luck after I noticed I was not getting even close to the precision I was looking for.

I will shoot those longer COALs, return to 2.2 and then test some seating depths around 2.26.

 

[Molon]

Reloading For The AR-15: Hornady 75 Grain BTHP

Hornady produces three different versions of their 75 grain open-tip-match bullet in 22 caliber (0.224”). For this article, we’ll be looking at the projectile that is colloquially referred to as the “T1”.

The T1 is available as a reloading component, with a product number of #2279 for the 100 count boxes. It’s also available in 600 and 4000 count boxes.

I use the Hornady 75 grain BTHP bullet to load match-grade hand-loads for my semi-automatic AR-15s chambered in 5.56mm/223 Remington. According to Ballistic Performance of Rifle Bullets by Bryan Litz, the Hornady 75 grain BTHP has an average G1 ballistic coefficient of 0.356 and an average G7 ballistic coefficient of 0.183.

The lot of T1 projectiles used for this article have a nominal length of 0.988” and I load them to a nominal COAL of 2.245”. When fired from a Colt SOCOM barrel with a 5.56mm NATO chamber, this COAL will create a jump to the lands of 178 thousandths of an inch. When fired from a Larue Stealth barrel with a 223 Wylde chamber, this COAL will create a jump to the lands of 115 thousandths of an inch and when fired from a Krieger barrel with a 223 Remington chamber, this COAL will create a jump to the lands of 78 thousandths of an inch.

The jump to the lands figures stated above where obtained using a Sinclair bullet seating depth gauge and a Forster 223 Remington 1.4636” head-space gauge. These figures are contingent upon a variety of variables, such as the particular chamber reamer that was used for your barrel, the number of rounds that have been fired through your barrel when the measurement is obtained, the particular lot of bullets used and whether you use a virgin case, a fired case, a resized case or a head-space gauge to obtain this measurement.

WARNING!
Reloading is an inherently dangerous activity. The information provided here is for educational purposes only. It is not intended to be used for the actual loading of ammunition by the reader. No warranty, guarantee or assurance that these loads are safe is stated, suggested or implied nor should any be inferred. Usage of this information for the actual loading of ammunition may result in malfunctions, damage and destruction of property and grave injury or death to beings human in nature or otherwise. Don't even view this information in the presence of children or small animals.




For this hand-load of the Hornady 75 grain BTHP bullet, I use virgin Lake City brass that has been weight-sorted, match-prepped and neck-sized. The cases are primed with Federal GM205M primers and charged with VihtaVuori N140 powder and as mentioned above, the T1 projectile is seated to a COAL of 2.245”. This process is conducted in a semi-progressive manner on a Dillon XL-650 press using a Pact Digital electronic powder dispenser and scale to dispense a powder charge of 24.1 grains of the VihtaVuori N140.

When chronographed from a 20” Colt A2 barrel, a 10-shot string of this hand-load fired over an Oehler 35P produced a muzzle velocity of 2638 FPS with a standard deviation of 4 FPS and a coefficient of variation of 0.15%. (The muzzle velocity was calculated from the instrumental velocity using Oehler Ballistic Explorer.) A 10-shot group fired from one of my Krieger barreled AR-15s, at distance of 100 yards using my bench-rest set-up, had an extreme spread of 0.526 MOA.

No canines were harmed during the testing of this ammunition.

....

 

[aklaunch]

Oh boy.... Not every barrel likes every bullet. Does not mean the bullet is bad. I have learned this so many times.

Try N135 and N140 and get back to us. If those do not work... Save your 75's for another barrel, or your next barrel.

No sweat!

 

[ma smith]

Try N135 and N140 and get back to us. If those do not work...

+1

 

[Yondering]

Been using 24.1gr N140 and 75bthp for years. Shoots good in 2 AR's and bolt gun. 24.1 gr N140 listed in Sierra data as THE accuracy load for 77 gr bthp. We shoot to 500 yds with excellent results. Try seating those 75bthp to 2.235-40 coal. Good luck!

This is exactly what the OP needs; a known good accuracy load with powder he can get.

Note the seating depth; not full mag length, but not as short as possible either. OP, make sure to try somewhere in the 2.230-2.240 range, along with maybe 2.210"-ish and 2.255".

And remember to try some other primers.

 

[Near miss]

This is exactly what the OP needs; a known good accuracy load with powder he can get.

Note the seating depth; not full mag length, but not as short as possible either. OP, make sure to try somewhere in the 2.230-2.240 range, along with maybe 2.210"-ish and 2.255".

And remember to try some other primers.

Already tried COALs of
2.230 with 23.9 and 24.4gr (avg mean radius @100m 0.98")
2.250 with 23.9, 24.4, 24.5, 24.7, 25.0 and 25.2gr (avg MR @100 0.97")
2.260 with 24.5, 24.7, 24.8, 25.0 and 25.2 (avg MR @100m 0.87", but without the 25.0gr group avg is 0.73" mean radius)
This is why I was going to up the seating depth, it seemed just a tiny bit more promise there.

I will try the 2.235 and 2.240 and see how they fare.

 

[Yondering]

Already tried COALs of
2.230 with 23.9 and 24.4gr (avg mean radius @100m 0.98")
2.250 with 23.9, 24.4, 24.5, 24.7, 25.0 and 25.2gr (avg MR @100 0.97")
2.260 with 24.5, 24.7, 24.8, 25.0 and 25.2 (avg MR @100m 0.87", but without the 25.0gr group avg is 0.73" mean radius)
This is why I was going to up the seating depth, it seemed just a tiny bit more promise there.

I will try the 2.235 and 2.240 and see how they fare.

But you said you did that with N540. The load I quoted is N140. Not the same; one of them might shoot great at a particular seating depth and the other might not shoot well with anything.

That is the curse of working with finicky barrels - you might find a particular load that shoots great, but everything else shoots poorly. Unlike a high quality barrel that shoots most loads reasonably well and you just look for the best one.

 

[Near miss]

But you said you did that with N540. The load I quoted is N140. Not the same; one of them might shoot great at a particular seating depth and the other might not shoot well with anything.

That is the curse of working with finicky barrels - you might find a particular load that shoots great, but everything else shoots poorly. Unlike a high quality barrel that shoots most loads reasonably well and you just look for the best one.

True.

I might not have enough N140 to test all those coals but at least try the 2.23-2.24 and see where it gets me.

To optimize powder, should I try in increments of 0.005 or 0.010? Or even 0.003?

I know that some seating depths are quite slim but originally I expected to get something better at some point by testing in bigger increments. Then after striking to a good zone applying more finer testing. (0.003)

I never knew finding a good load could be this hard!

 

[Yondering]

True.

I might not have enough N140 to test all those coals but at least try the 2.23-2.24 and see where it gets me.

To optimize powder, should I try in increments of 0.005 or 0.010? Or even 0.003?

I know that some seating depths are quite slim but originally I expected to get something better at some point by testing in bigger increments. Then after striking to a good zone applying more finer testing. (0.003)

I never knew finding a good load could be this hard!

I would start with exactly that load above, and try some different primers. You may find it shoots great with a particular primer but not others. If you can get Tula, Wolf, or S&B SR primers, try those.

Then, if you didn’t land on a hammer of a load accidentally, vary the powder up and down a bit (up until you find max, down maybe 1-2 grains) in .3gr increments. Maybe 3-4 rounds each; that’s not enough to tell you if a load is really good but it’s enough to tell rule out the loads that suck. (A 2” 3 shot group won’t get better with more rounds, no use wasting the components.)

Then pick the best of those, even if it’s not what you like, and adjust seating depth. Normally I’d start with .030” increments but in this case the range you have to work with is relatively small, so maybe .015” or .010” increments makes sense. This is just to narrow in on what is best, the. Fine tune from there if necessary, but at minimum shoot a bunch of rounds to confirm it’s a good load.

And of course, by “a bunch of rounds” I don’t meant a bunch of 3-5 shot groups in different targets. Put a bunch of rounds in one target, then use tool like Ballistic-X to measure them and calculate your mean radius. Then you’ll have a solid measurement of what your rifle is capable of doing and it’s ability (as a percentage) to put a round on a given size target at that distance.

 

[Molon]

2.230 with 23.9 and 24.4gr (avg mean radius @100m 0.98")
2.250 with 23.9, 24.4, 24.5, 24.7, 25.0 and 25.2gr (avg MR @100 0.97")
2.260 with 24.5, 24.7, 24.8, 25.0 and 25.2 (avg MR @100m 0.87", but without the 25.0gr group avg is 0.73" mean radius)
This is why I was going to up the seating depth, it seemed just a tiny bit more promise there.

The mean radius measurement means nothing if you don't include the number of shots in the group(s) used to obtain that measurement.

...

 

[Near miss]

I only had less than an ounce of N140.

I just thought that using 5 rounds previously was waste. I will just shoot 3 shot groups except with Molons load and if 2 shots even go near each other, I'll celebrate it.

I use my own printed version of 10m air pistol target and TargetScan app to track my loads. It shows both spread and MR of each group and can consolidate them.

Earlier mentioned mean radiuses were gotten with 5 round groups.

 

[Near miss]

I am having problems with seating depth too now.

To get to very close to the same coal that molon created with 0.988 bullet length..
I started recording single cartridge coals after first measuring the bullet length and then calculating the supposed difference out of it.
I do not have an ogive meter, I've never needed one..

Well, the same length with another bullet is giving me .010 of variance between the two.
So 2.255 and 2.245.

I am using redding micrometer seating die and it is really accurate, to my experience.

Also the bullet length varies significantly, compared to scenar at least, 0.977 to 0.996, actually found one .999..

Is this normal?

 

[spife7980]

Yep, get a bullet comparator to put on your calipers and measure the bullet on its ogive down low towards the bearing surface where the bullet would actually touch the barrel, that number will (should) be much more consistent.

 

[Near miss]

Current Molon load: 75gr HPBT, N140 24.1gr, Ginex SRP, Geco case (1.75" 1.980cm3)
5x Molon
3x Molon 2235
3x Molon 24.5

Remains 0.79 ounces of N140. Thanks to all of you.

I will report back how this looks like, I plan to go to 300m range tomorrow for a brief testing.
I will also probably shoot a lot during the weekend at 150m so I can test other improved loads then.

 

[Molon]

I am having problems with seating depth too now.

To get to very close to the same coal that molon created with 0.988 bullet length..
I started recording single cartridge coals after first measuring the bullet length and then calculating the supposed difference out of it.
I do not have an ogive meter, I've never needed one..

Well, the same length with another bullet is giving me .010 of variance between the two.
So 2.255 and 2.245.

I am using redding micrometer seating die and it is really accurate, to my experience.

Also the bullet length varies significantly, compared to scenar at least, 0.977 to 0.996, actually found one .999..

Is this normal?

That's not uncommon for the Hornady 75 grain BTHP and it's the reason that I load that bullet to a nominal COAL of 2.245" for semi-automatic AR-15s.

...

 

[Yondering]

That's not uncommon for the Hornady 75 grain BTHP and it's the reason that I load that bullet to a nominal COAL of 2.245" for semi-automatic AR-15s.

...

Yep, this. Naturally it's much more accurate to track your loaded cartridge length with CBTO measurements, but OAL is at least necessary to make sure the rounds fit in the magazine.

 

[avidflyer]

They work great for me but I use TAC with them.

whats your tac load?

 

[straightshooter1]

Yep, this. Naturally it's much more accurate to track your loaded cartridge length with CBTO measurements, but OAL is at least necessary to make sure the rounds fit in the magazine.

True. And one just needs to be aware that one's CBTO measurements has no relevance to anyone else due to wide variations in comparators and chamber dimensions.

 

[BuildingConceptsllc]

whats your tac load?

I don't have my book in front of me but I can get it shortly. My bolt gun load is 25.2 gr but that's over max.

My AR load is 24.3gr. Have to get the book in front of me to give the BTO or COAL

 

[BuildingConceptsllc]

whats your tac load?

AR- 24.3 gr TAC
Lapua Brass (I use that for testing then move to the same fps in Fed brass)
CBTO 1.852
COAL 2.235 ish (but I don't really use COAL as long as it fits in a mag)

 

[Baron85]

The Hornady 75’s really suck. You should send them to me for disposal top is 5 round other 2 are 3 round groups at 100 out of my lilja barreled AR. 24.4 gn N140 FC brass, cci450’s 1.848 ogive length. I need to seat them a tad deeper. I had some issues binding in my mags.

These 3 groups were shot consecutively and are the best the rifle and I have performed. I normally hover around 1/2-3/4” as an overall average with this rifle. I have just never been able to be consistent with AR platform.

I have also had good success with Tac and the Hornady 75’s but wasn’t as consistent as the N140

 

[Yondering]

True. And one just needs to be aware that one's CBTO measurements has no relevance to anyone else due to wide variations in comparators and chamber dimensions.

Yep. That's a super important concept that a lot of people don't understand. I cringe when I see someone sharing their CBTO measurement for someone else to copy; even just .001" difference in hole size or amount of chamfer on the edge is enough to completely change the measurement.

Of course then we get someone offering up their CBTO measurement right here. It doesn't mean anything to the rest of us, dude, and it's just misleading to the newbies who don't know that.

 

[Baron85]

Absolutely, but it does give a somewhat accurate reference or starting point. And like everything else related to reloading you have to do your own work up. What shoots in your barrel won’t necessarily shoot in mine. All the details given though help form trends. As it appears 24 ish grains of n140 seems to work for multiple people.

 

[BuildingConceptsllc]

Yep. That's a super important concept that a lot of people don't understand. I cringe when I see someone sharing their CBTO measurement for someone else to copy; even just .001" difference in hole size or amount of chamfer on the edge is enough to completely change the measurement.

Of course then we get someone offering up their CBTO measurement right here. It doesn't mean anything to the rest of us, dude, and it's just misleading to the newbies who don't know that.

So no one is allowed to give a CBTO because it varies from set up to set up???? Strange take there dude

 

[straightshooter1]

Absolutely, but it does give a somewhat accurate reference or starting point. And like everything else related to reloading you have to do your own work up. What shoots in your barrel won’t necessarily shoot in mine. All the details given though help form trends. As it appears 24 ish grains of n140 seems to work for multiple people.

"Somewhat accurate reference or starting point"???

It doesn't tell anyone, with any accuracy, somewhat or otherwise the seating depth since there's such variance in comparators AND variance in bullet ogives where BOT's are almost always very different from lot to lot. A particular CBTO could be .040 off my lands in my rifle, but could be .010" of jam in your rifle. With such a variance, it really doesn't' serve any purpose, even as a starting point, which can be as good as any guess. IMHO, a good "starting point" is simply to decide on a particular jump from the lands (like, maybe .010") for whatever reasoning and go from there. .010" off my lands is very likely to be very different seating depth. But the difference in seating depth has no meaning when we're really just taking about a "starting point" and load workup goes from there.

With all the variances involved, how do we best communicate "somewhat accurately" our loads in terms of seating depths or cartridge specs?

The best answer I've come up with so far, other than having a sample cartridge in hand, is by knowing cartridge's COAL. Even though there can be substantial variance in meplats producing variance in COALs, the variance is pretty uniform across various lots (particularly with the higher quality projectiles, like Berger). And I can take someone's COAL, and using my own unique comparator measurements, get a "somewhat accurate" idea for seating depth and how well the cartridge might fit in my chamber or not. Though this is also not accurate, I find it's the most "somewhat accurate" way to duplicate someone's cartridge specs.

 

[Baron85]

Fair enough. For me I just like to be able to look at what people are using and see if it’s a short mag length like for AR or if it’s loaded long for custom throated bolt guns. Makes a difference on safe powder charges. I only measure OAL initially to make sure it will fit in mags then convert that measurement to ogive since measuring ogive is much more consistent and accurate. Once I know the longest I can ever be I stick with ogive only.

I can absolutely see your point on the OAL being an easier and possibly more consistent universal way to communicate loads with others.

And I think we are both agree that no matter what anyone else is shooting you still have to do the work your self to make sure the load is safe and accurate in your rifle. Figure out the land, safe starting charge, how much jump ect.

 

[Yondering]

So no one is allowed to give a CBTO because it varies from set up to set up???? Strange take there dude

I didn't say anything about "allowed to". Get out of here with that passive aggressive BS.

But if you really think your CBTO measurement is relevant to other people using different comparator tools, you must not understand the measurement very well. If you're showing the difference between different loads using the same tool, that's one thing. But if you're suggesting someone else try the same CBTO length, you're making a huge assumption that their comparator has exactly the same bearing surface dimensions as yours. That's not a "strange take", that's a realistic look at tolerances and how the measurement is taken.

The tool I use for 5.56 for example has actual rifling and a chamber throat in it - should I share those measurements with you, and would it be of any value? Or what if I'm using a round hole comparator that measures .223" and yours measures .220" - do you understand how that changes the measurement?

As pointed out above, despite COAL variations, it's still the more consistent way to share loads with other people.

 

[Near miss]

Ok range report time.

I fucked up bad but as they say, a bad day at the still beats a good day out of the range..

I arrived to the range and was told its been reserved for mil training. They let me in to shoot as long as they take to gather up. So I was in big hurry, always good when testing loads.

I set up the target and chrono, warmed up my gun with few Geco shots, shot my chrono and proceeded to shoot scenar control group.
I messed it up big and improved my hold and position. But I only had those 4 scenars left as I had already left them out a week or two ago, determined to switch to hornadys. Maybe a tad too early.

After that I moved to N140 groups.
1: 75gr HPBT, 2245, N140 24.1gr, Ginex SRP, Geco case
2: changed to 2235 coal. I did not call that outlier.
3: changed to 24.5gr. Same thing.

But these clearly show promise. Not great, but at least there is light visible looking at the big picture.

They still did not come to kick me out so I continued with the N540 long loads.
The group 3 was pretty weird. That's all to say about these I guess.

After I rose up I noticed there was a guy looking at me, apparently they had waited for me to finish.. They even asked if I want my target patched.

The range:

 

[BuildingConceptsllc]

I didn't say anything about "allowed to". Get out of here with that passive aggressive BS.

But if you really think your CBTO measurement is relevant to other people using different comparator tools, you must not understand the measurement very well. If you're showing the difference between different loads using the same tool, that's one thing. But if you're suggesting someone else try the same CBTO length, you're making a huge assumption that their comparator has exactly the same bearing surface dimensions as yours. That's not a "strange take", that's a realistic look at tolerances and how the measurement is taken.

The tool I use for 5.56 for example has actual rifling and a chamber throat in it - should I share those measurements with you, and would it be of any value? Or what if I'm using a round hole comparator that measures .223" and yours measures .220" - do you understand how that changes the measurement?

As pointed out above, despite COAL variations, it's still the more consistent way to share loads with other people.

That wasn't passive aggressive, it wasn't passive nor was it aggressive.

You chastised me for simply posting a CBTO and declared that it shouldn't be done. I was asked a question and I answered it. I ALSO PUT THE COAL! If whoever would like the comparator # I use and further info, they can ask for that too and I will post it. Everyone has been made fully aware that CBTO can vary depending on how its measures. I'm glad we got that cleared up.

Why this is such an issue for you I have no idea. Like I said, "strange take".

 

[TonyTheTiger]

As a new reloader, they have been the most frustrating bullet I’ve tried in any caliber.

Try the Hornady 68 if you really want to pull your hair out.

 

[straightshooter1]

Fair enough. For me I just like to be able to look at what people are using and see if it’s a short mag length like for AR or if it’s loaded long for custom throated bolt guns. Makes a difference on safe powder charges. I only measure OAL initially to make sure it will fit in mags then convert that measurement to ogive since measuring ogive is much more consistent and accurate. Once I know the longest I can ever be I stick with ogive only.

Yeah, I pretty much do the same thing, whether it's trying to determine an COAL that'll fit my mags or seeing just where the CBTO is in relation to my lands from a stated COAL. I can seat a dummy cartridge to the COAL and take a CBTO measurement and then develop the load relative to my unique comparator CBTO measurements.

I can absolutely see your point on the OAL being an easier and possibly more consistent universal way to communicate loads with others.

And I think we are both agree that no matter what anyone else is shooting you still have to do the work your self to make sure the load is safe and accurate in your rifle. Figure out the land, safe starting charge, how much jump ect.

Yes, I absolutely agree.

Someone's outstanding performance with their particular load configuration just doesn't mean it's actually going to work in my gun. Though, it could be a "starting point" if I know the COAL and the powder charge.

 

[Yondering]

That wasn't passive aggressive, it wasn't passive nor was it aggressive.

You chastised me for simply posting a CBTO and declared that it shouldn't be done. I was asked a question and I answered it. I ALSO PUT THE COAL! If whoever would like the comparator # I use and further info, they can ask for that too and I will post it. Everyone has been made fully aware that CBTO can vary depending on how its measures. I'm glad we got that cleared up.

Why this is such an issue for you I have no idea. Like I said, "strange take".

Hey fella. We can have a technical discussion without all the drama. Sorry if I hurt your feelings.

 

[Near miss]

I have lapua brass with 450s also, I can make Molons out of those.
I have not used them yet as I still have few factory 69gr boxes to shoot.

I ordered a bottle of N140, you cannot have too much of it either, right?
N140 will be good for making normal 223 pressure rounds. The 540 packs a bit better and I could put few more tenths (4 or 5) of it before starting to compress. This is with scenar, which is a bit longer at 1.037"
N540 1.60g 24.7gr Scenar 5.0g 77gr 5,743mm 2,261"
N540 1.65 25.5 Scenar 5.0 77 5,754 2,265
N140 1.60 24.7 Scenar 5.0 77 5,765 2,270
N140 1.65 25.5 Scenar 5.0 77 5,783 2,277


What comes to the topic of CBTO, I think MORE data never hurts.

 

[Yondering]

What comes to the topic of CBTO, I think MORE data never hurts.

I take it you've never seen statistics being misused then, for example? Misleading data always has potential to be harmful. And those who think someone else's CBTO value is useful are the ones who will be misled by it.

 

[Near miss]

I take it you've never seen statistics being misused then, for example? Misleading data always has potential to be harmful. And those who think someone else's CBTO value is useful are the ones who will be misled by it.

Well that is true.
But my basis for this is that as long as the values given are factual, the reader is responsible for interpreting it.
If someone goes advertising his CBTOs, I am not going to censor him.

But you letting people know that these values are not applicable in real sense is great. Sharing them is futile since to my knowledge, even between the products of same make and model with each other, the readings are not accurate.
But I do not own and probably will not own one, I use the crimped case that holds the bullet in place and I seat the average length bullet to different settings and see that I get consistent readings, then use that value.

I usually rather produce too many details than leave something out. Maybe one day (never) they will standardize the ogive and it will be within reason, same to everybody.

 

[Near miss]

I cleaned my barrel, it was quite a mess (but want to mention that scenars still did not do badly) It had some weird blue crystallized stuff in it, these are photos I took after I washed it with break clean and brush.

Sadly I only could put 11 scenar factory loads out during last weekend and those were in hurry. 1.38moa at 150m, pretty much just blasted them away so with that in mind, it was good.

Today I got to shoot at 300m and only shot the Molon load with Lapua cases from 300m. I guesstimated 3 clicks up from my Geco 55gr / mild Scenar load setting and it was spot on.

The windage was left from my friend shooting few Geco 55s with it in between my shooting sessions and I forgot to change it.

The specifics of this Molon load:
24.1gr N140, Lapua Case, Ginex SR primer, 2.245" COAL *Edited

I shot the other 5 loaded with Geco cases from 100m. The POA was just 3" black hole so it probably did not help, I messed the first shot and I call that on me. For the 100m I dialed 0 windage.

I am intending this load to be cheap, easy going load so I am not going to shoot these with Lapua cases. But clearly they run ok with N140 and I will test larger sample with Geco cases next time. Thanks to Molon and everybody else for the tips and advises.

 

[Mr Tibbs]

I live in Finland so VV powders are pretty much my only options. Other is Alliance powders but have not seen them in stock. Their future availability is also quite uncertain.

I could try using the few ounces of N140 that I left.

Testing seating depth even further down is probably a good idea. Going to try that before scrapping them.

Tbh having gone this far my expectations for success are quite low but finding an accurate node would be quite nice. And I preferably want a load that does not require any fiddling or special sauces.

Have you tryed using the CBTO method ? Those Hornad’s pretty long bullets

 

[308pirate]

When I look around the web, you and I aren’t the only ones that can’t get these to shoot. Sure, I see some people with some magical loads for these. But I also see quite a few that can’t get them to shoot. They seem pretty picky. As a new reloader, they have been the most frustrating bullet I’ve tried in any caliber.

I reach a Master classification in NRA Service Rifle shooting nothing but Hornady 75 HPBT in random Lake City 5.56X45 cases with Remington 7 1/2 primers and Alliant Reloder 15. Later on I replaced RL15 with Ramshot TAC with excellent results.

They were very forgiving to load and shoot. Unless Hornady changed the design of the bullet from 16 years ago, I have no idea how you guys find them difficult to use.