Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Ramshot TAC Disappointment

Ruger280,

I use CCI BR4's, the target version of the CCI 400 small rifle primer.

if you like to shoot 62 grain bullets, figure out what the military uses for its 62 grain green tip ball ammo, I have pulled those bullets and seated a 60 grain vmax and gotten spectacular speeds, well at least for a 60 grain bullet. the green tip ball ammo shoots horrible, but if you put a decent bullet on, it can shoot very accurately

Cummins, have you ever weighed the charge?

I wonder if it is a military version of H335?

I prefer TAC over anything else I have tried in small cases. I won a BR match with it a few years ago. If you keep it hot, it burns very clean. I have had great luck with it in 22-250 with 40 grain bullets and .222 with 40 and 50 grain bullets. That pretty well splits it. Xterminator is definitely faster than TAC.

I have never loaded TAC for a gas gun but have for a bolt .223 and it didn't disappoint. Wasn't loading heavy bullets though. I think I was running around 28.5 with the 40s and 27.5 with the 50s. This stuff is money! It is way better than 748.

Back 30 years ago I used the old Speer #9 manual when I started loading. In that manual you had better work the load up. I started loading 222 rem and used win 748. I ended up about .3 grains less than max, and that was still pushing it a little. Todays manual shows a max charge of 2 grains less with that powder. Yet it shows the same pressure. The differance is that back them they expected that you would act responcibly and be responcible for what you do. Not today, with all the lawyers and people sueing for what is their fault, these reloading people know their arse is in the wind.

What I believe they do now is build the test barrels to absolute minimun specs in both chamber and bore. Believe me when I say, My DPMS is not minimum spec. My custom 284 winchester is in fact has a minimum spec chamber, and it tops out with a 168gr match bullet and H4831sc at 1.7 grains less than max.


I striped the DPMS down for cleaning after only 40 rounds of that load I made, it was filthy. Ball powders never seem to burn well below near maximum pressures. They burn dirty and inconsistantly. When I made this load I noted that it was only 80-85% of case capacity, I knew that was going to be a problem. In a best case situation, ball powders work best with a full case, or even a little compression.

I'm going to test the bullets now. I'll load a few with Varget and see if it makes much differance. Except I need a load for Varget and a 62 grain bullet.

Crosshair,

The big difference between loading manuals today and several decades ago (when I also started loading) is that today's manuals are based on pressure-tested data. In the 1960's most of them were still worked up by adding powder until the rifle and ammo showed signs of real distress, then the load was backed off a little.

Other than that, there is no overall pattern to the data presented in today's manuals. Some (including Nosler and Ramshot) show the data they got from their pressure barrels. Others work up loads in pressure barrels and then chronograph it in sporters, which often results in low velocities.

There is also a much bigger difference in bullets today than there used to be. Fory years ago most of the bullets available resulted in about the same amount of pressure. You could use Sierra data to load Winchester or Hiornady bullets and not get in a lot of trouble. But the wide variety of bullets today makes it advisable to use data worked up for the specific bullet being loaded--or at least something as similar as possible.

I've worked up loads for quite a few cartridge/Ramshot powder combinations using a chronograph to see how velocity was coming along. I came to the conclusion that Ramshot's data is usually very close to being spot on.

24.5 grains of TAC and a 62 grain TSX shot fine in my gas gun, 47 grains shoots fine in a 308 under a 130TTSX

The velocity, as long as it's reasonable, is not really important. Accuracy is though, and I'm only asking about 2 moa out of this gun, otherwise I would have bought high dollar bullets. I have a RRA NM for the real accurate stuff. This is a run and gun rifle. Still, 5 moa + is not acceptable.

I am beginning to suspect more and more that this is a bullet problem, not a powder problem.

There is nothing wrong with the Prvi bullet as a run of the mil type. I've shot some prvi loads useing that bullet and get 2 moa or so. When I open the gun up and find it filthy after only 40 rounds it is a powder problem, simply didn't burn right, especially in the cold. If it burns dirty then it figures to have burned inconsistantly. I kicked the pressure up, we will see soon. well, as soon as it warms up a little, I'm getting too old to like shooting in 20 degree weather.

always interesting to see the newer folks get tripped up... the more years you have loading the more it'll all make more sense.

If I'd have done the same thing, complain, when I first shot N540 I'd have quit right there, snooped a bit, found the loads needed to be hotter and boom... tight groups, high speeds and acceptable pressure.

TAC is one of the best 223 powders for heavier bullets, IE its SUPER with 77s... have no clue on the 62s but I'd say you are weak as noted...

Varget and 62s... 25.5 should be really safe I'd think.. I"d be guessing you could shoot over 26 depending on the lot....

What you have to understand is that there are so many variables... brass, chambers, barrels, lots of powder, primers, etc... a 62 is not just the same.. IE some are steel penetrators, some not, same weight bullets some have more or less bearing surface and so on.

The best you can do is learn to read pressure signs and move forward from there.
Especially in an AR, rim lifts are not always a sign,cratered or flat primers not always, but a smear of the ejector usually is a sign that I try to avoid...

Jeff

So unique always burns inconsistently? I for a fact, have quite a few loads with surplus ball powder that are dirty, but win many matches I shoot in and are extremely uniform and accurate....

There isn't anything new about reloading to me. When I put that load together I looked in that case and saw the low desity load and figured it would be not good. And I was right! The only reason I try a ball powder is for speed sake, otherwise they are mostly all stick powders. The best powder for 223 is Varget, my RRA NM shoots Varget and 50-60 grain V-Max bullets into the same hole.

While I didn't figure that first load would be great, I sure didn't expect it to be that bad.

SSSHHHHH!!!!! That stuff is hard enough to find the way it is and hense the reason TAC is getting so popular. Ramshot powders in general are VERY available. At least through mail order, I can't get it locally.

Can a civilian ship powder? Or do you need an explosives license to ship powder?

I might be willing to take that dirty, inaccurate TAC off your hands, if so.

Sycamore

I pushed the Hornady 75 BTHP to 2780 in a 16" RRA barrel with TAC. It was the fastest vel I got that bullet. Don't try this without LOTS of experience and case head mic'ing as this is in NATO pressure area and one can get hurt.

Alan

But how was the accuracy?

Were Varget, RL15, and H4895 in this test as well?

I would love to make a 68 or 75 hornady hp sing!

I didn't say it was dirty and inaccurate in general, just at that load level. At NATO load levels it might be fine. Kind of like burning diesel in an engin with too low compression.

Crosshair, is your AR a standard 223 chamber? If it isn't that may account for the lower pressure/velocity.

Curious to see how your higher charge levels improve your outcome.