|
|
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,098
Campfire Regular
|
OP
Campfire Regular
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,098 |
Hello, Yes, I skipped the "I've Almost Done It II" & III because the pun was just too good  In my ongoing quest to get sub-MOA 100yd groups from bulk ammo, I sort by weight and modify using D Rock's tool. I've recently switched to American Eagle 38gn HP. The bullet weight and powder charge are very consistent, but the cases are not - they seem to vary largely on the amount of priming compound, and some are therefore louder than others. I come sooo close to sub-MOA 5 shot groups many times, and have broken it numerous occasions if I throw out a flier or two, but there always seems to be one or two that prevent the sub-MOA five shot group. Here are two of the best groups I managed tonight, out of a total of three groups: ![[Linked Image]](http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b191/WabashShootist/Guns/hollowpointer/6615a37e.jpg) ![[Linked Image]](http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b191/WabashShootist/Guns/hollowpointer/6cb3f5c5.jpg) As you can see, three are sub-MOA (with one three shot group being almost 1/2 MOA at 100yds!). However, I have vertical stringing. I need to see if I can get some help with that. My front rest was the rifle's bipod, and the rear rest was a squeeze sock. I shot prone, sniper style (vs the one leg bent position I'd been taught). I know I had a little vertical movement, but this much? The wind was dead calm. I didn't have to adjust windage at all. Do you suppose I'm at the mechanical limits of the gun, my own limits, the limits of the ammo due to the inconsistency of the primer charges and the whole sonic barrier thing, or all or none of the above? My 'scope is a Mueller 4.5-14x APV. The rifle is a Savage MkII BTVS that I pillar bedded. The barrel is definitely free floating. Torque on the action screws are 55in-lb front (this one has been modified to take a main bolt) and the rear, being stock, takes about 25in-lb or so. Is there something I should be doing that I am not? Or am I just pressing the limits too much? What do you all think? Thanks, Josh
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 29,969 Likes: 10
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 29,969 Likes: 10 |
I'd speculate the limits of the ammo without additional sorting. I say that only because the $20 a box stuff can still out perform off the shelf brands. Seems some of the serious anal folks also sort by rim thickness to good effect. Rather than measure, they build sort of go no-go guages to different dimensions for sorting. Two of my rimfires (an Anschutz and a Ruger 77/22 also respond well to American Eagles. I go though about 10+ K rds a year ground squirreling, and simply can not afford the expensive target stuff.
Last edited by 1minute; 07/18/10.
1Minute
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 5,978
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 5,978 |
Hello, Yes, I skipped the "I've Almost Done It II" & III because the pun was just too good In my ongoing quest to get sub-MOA 100yd groups from bulk ammo, I sort by weight and modify using D Rock's tool. I've recently switched to American Eagle 38gn HP. The bullet weight and powder charge are very consistent, but the cases are not - they seem to vary largely on the amount of priming compound, and some are therefore louder than others. I come sooo close to sub-MOA 5 shot groups many times, and have broken it numerous occasions if I throw out a flier or two, but there always seems to be one or two that prevent the sub-MOA five shot group. Here are two of the best groups I managed tonight, out of a total of three groups: As you can see, three are sub-MOA (with one three shot group being almost 1/2 MOA at 100yds!). However, I have vertical stringing. I need to see if I can get some help with that. My front rest was the rifle's bipod, and the rear rest was a squeeze sock. I shot prone, sniper style (vs the one leg bent position I'd been taught). I know I had a little vertical movement, but this much? The wind was dead calm. I didn't have to adjust windage at all. Do you suppose I'm at the mechanical limits of the gun, my own limits, the limits of the ammo due to the inconsistency of the primer charges and the whole sonic barrier thing, or all or none of the above? My 'scope is a Mueller 4.5-14x APV. The rifle is a Savage MkII BTVS that I pillar bedded. The barrel is definitely free floating. Torque on the action screws are 55in-lb front (this one has been modified to take a main bolt) and the rear, being stock, takes about 25in-lb or so. Is there something I should be doing that I am not? Or am I just pressing the limits too much? What do you all think? Thanks, Josh I think you are a wasting your time trying to "make" chaap high velecity ammo shoot as consistently as target grade stuff. The loading specs that make target grade ammo more accruate than cheap HV stuff have to do withg the consisntenty are the priming charge, power charge and bullet weights, things that your bullet forming tools won't do a damn thing about. And all, those things are showing up at 100 years as you vertical stringing. My advice is to get some some Wolf Match target or SK Standard for $5 per box. That is a goods starting point. Not the $2 a box crap American companies load for plinking. The loads will at least be consistent and then you can diddle with the nose shape to fit the sporting spec chamber in you Savage.
To all gunmaker critics-
"It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena.."- Teddy Roosevelt
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 61,130
Campfire Kahuna
|
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 61,130 |
Joshua;
Get a chronograph and verify velocity, extreme spread, and standard deviation at the muzzle and at or near 100 yards. I suspect the ES/SD is getting you with possible problems with transonic bullets at range.
Those numbers from the chrony will, I suspect, answer most of your questions.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 13,436
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 13,436 |
I spent a lot of time about 10 years ago testing 22 ammo.
I sorted all of it by weight and rim thickness. I found that sorting "cheap" 22 ammo did nothing to improve accuracy. By "cheap" I mean bulk and stuff sold for about a $1 or less.
I shot groups of this ammo sorted, and unsorted, and found no difference in accuracy.
I found that ammo priced in the midrange like Wolf Match Target, and RWS R-100 did produce better groups by sorting.
And, the high end Eley and Lapua needed no sorting as it was "sorted" at the factory with their use of weight consistent components.
I even bought a laboratory scale to do the weighing, and had a special rim thickness gage made up.
Don Buckbee
JPFO
NRA Benefactor Member
NSSA Life Member
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 21,820 Likes: 3
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 21,820 Likes: 3 |
Good LUck with this project. My CZ452 is a solid 1 MOA rifle with American Eagle 38 grainers (at least side to side).  Vertically it displaces about 2 MOA  It is a fine sage rat load. BMT
Last edited by BMT; 07/19/10.
"The Church can and should help modern society by tirelessly insisting that the work of women in the home be recognized and respected by all in its irreplaceable value." Apostolic Exhortation On The Family, Pope John Paul II
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,340
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,340 |
Put a half inch white dot in the center of that target and shoot off sandbags on about 6 power and report back...........
After reading your first post on this I was curious about the Winchester 77 that I fixed and put a 4x Bushnell on. I took it out two weekends ago at 100 with Remington Golden Bullet bulk pack - no sorting- and shot a 5 round that went 1.42". While not MOA it was surprising since I was really not trying that hard. Aim small hit small, your targets are pretty big.
Ryan
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 6,755
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 6,755 |
78CJ
Did they all fire?
Your results are much different than mine. A rifle that shoots Eley into 1/2" at 50 yards shoots that Golden Bullet into 2" at 50 and quite a few fail to fire. For high velocity hollow points I've had much better results with Winchester Power Points.
He who joyfully marches in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would suffice.
- Albert Einstein
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,340
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,340 |
Yeah. I have never had a problem actually had to switch to them from the Federals because the federal will not cycle the action.
Ironically enough though my new GSG likes the Federals better.
Ryan
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 29,969 Likes: 10
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 29,969 Likes: 10 |
Doubletap: Yes, those are my favorites for a Ruger 77/22 and my Anschutz, but I've only been able to score 2 cases over the last 3 years. Are they still being made, and if so, where are they available? Not seen them on a shelf in about a 300 mile radius for over a year. That being, the American Eagles are my present goto brand.
Last edited by 1minute; 07/22/10.
1Minute
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 33
Campfire Greenhorn
|
|
Campfire Greenhorn
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 33 |
I think that bulk ammo is only cheaper if you ignore the duds and fliers. If you figure in even 2% failures the cost difference disappears. You work cheap if your time sorting and measuring doesn't compensate for the marginal difference.
That said, How accurate is your scale? If it doesn't get down to 0.01 grams or better, you are still winging it IMO. I bought some Federal Champion Target ammo at Dick's last week. Weighing it was an eye opener. First, only one of my rifles shot well with the stuff. But the weights varied 0.13 grams from lightest to heaviest. That to me is not target grade ammo. YMMV.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,098
Campfire Regular
|
|
OP
Campfire Regular
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,098 |
That said, How accurate is your scale? If it doesn't get down to 0.01 grams or better, you are still winging it IMO. I bought some Federal Champion Target ammo at Dick's last week. Weighing it was an eye opener. First, only one of my rifles shot well with the stuff. But the weights varied 0.13 grams from lightest to heaviest. That to me is not target grade ammo. YMMV.
Hello, I measure in grains. It measures 1/10 of a grain; in grams, it will measure four decimal places, IIRC. Josh
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 33
Campfire Greenhorn
|
|
Campfire Greenhorn
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 33 |
Hello,
I measure in grains.
It measures 1/10 of a grain; in grams, it will measure four decimal places, IIRC.
Josh
That ought to do it. In that case how do you sort it into groups. I try to get them into groups of +- 0.0005 grams. So for example when I was doing some blazzers last week they went mostly into two groups. Group A was from 3.276 to 3.285 with 3.280 being the mean, and group B went from 3.286 to 3.295. Everything else went into a plinking box for when I just want to shoot steel targets at 15 feet or so. I worked out very well with a minimal number of fliers.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,098
Campfire Regular
|
|
OP
Campfire Regular
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,098 |
Hello,
I sort everything +/- 0.1gn.
For example, I have a box for Blazers marked 50.8gn, then one for heavier and one for lighter (most are 50.8 +/- 0.1gn).
That would work out to 3.2918 grams +/- 0.0065 grams.
Josh
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 33
Campfire Greenhorn
|
|
Campfire Greenhorn
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 33 |
That is amazingly consistent for bulk ammo. I just measured 10 out of a box of Blazers that I have. They varied from 50.52 gn to 50.98 gn. I can't explain why I'm seeing such a large swing compared to your findings.
|
|
|
|
|
341 members (22250rem, 163bc, 17CalFan, 12344mag, 22magnut, 10ring1, 38 invisible),
1,335
guests, and
1,045
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,193,849
Posts18,517,549
Members74,020
| |
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|
