|
|
Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 17,898 Likes: 7
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 17,898 Likes: 7 |
I hadn't responded to this thread because Garandimal generally asks questions like this one that are kinda odd--and then often argues with the suggestions he receives. In this instance, he hasn't logged onto the Campfire since the day he posted the question--the 20th. Ad Hominem attack. Hurt feelings, John? "How much VARGET can the case hold under a 286 gr. bullet?" was his original question--NOT which powder to use.
How much Varget will fit under a 286-grain bullet depends VERY much on the particular 286-grain bullet--whether it's round-nosed, monolithic or whatever. Extraneous information that obfuscates the question. "I don't know," would have at least been an acceptable answer. Plus, there's plenty of Varget data for 286s available on conventional websites, such as Hodgdon and Nosler. You don't have to ask on the Campfire, or go to Accuratereleading.com. Hodgdon's Reloading Data Center - lists 59.0C grns./VARGET for 2350 fps., so maybe ~ 60.8C grns. would get it to 2400 fps.
Nosler's Load Data site - shows 55.5 grns./VARGET having a 99% Load Density. Reading for Content is a skill. But since some responders decided to suggest other powders I will too. Have been handloading the 9.3x62 for 20 years, in several rifles, and while I eventually ended up preferring Varget for 250-grain bullets, I use Ramshot Big Game with 286s, because it provides fine accuracy--and is just as temperature-stable as Varget. For me, that means getting the same velocities and point of impact from zero to around 85-90 Fahrenheit. All powders gain some velocity above about 85-90, how much depending on the powder--but "temp-stable" powders gain less. Have not had the same consistent results with some other powders suggested, such as Reloder 15. The question was RE: a specific powder/bullet weight/muzzle velocity, for a specified reason. Just asked about the net powder capacity. Garandimal might want to use Varget because he has some, and powders are often scarcer these days. But I just checked several websites for Big Game, and only one didn't have it in stock--and in fact one of the sites that did is offering a sale price. Specified exactly why it was selected. Thanks for nothin', John. GR He’s got you pegged, doesn’t he!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2014
Posts: 21,812 Likes: 2
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Sep 2014
Posts: 21,812 Likes: 2 |
I hadn't responded to this thread because Garandimal generally asks questions like this one that are kinda odd--and then often argues with the suggestions he receives. In this instance, he hasn't logged onto the Campfire since the day he posted the question--the 20th. Ad Hominem attack. Hurt feelings, John? "How much VARGET can the case hold under a 286 gr. bullet?" was his original question--NOT which powder to use.
How much Varget will fit under a 286-grain bullet depends VERY much on the particular 286-grain bullet--whether it's round-nosed, monolithic or whatever. Extraneous information that obfuscates the question. "I don't know," would have at least been an acceptable answer. Plus, there's plenty of Varget data for 286s available on conventional websites, such as Hodgdon and Nosler. You don't have to ask on the Campfire, or go to Accuratereleading.com. Hodgdon's Reloading Data Center - lists 59.0C grns./VARGET for 2350 fps., so maybe ~ 60.8C grns. would get it to 2400 fps.
Nosler's Load Data site - shows 55.5 grns./VARGET having a 99% Load Density. Reading for Content is a skill. But since some responders decided to suggest other powders I will too. Have been handloading the 9.3x62 for 20 years, in several rifles, and while I eventually ended up preferring Varget for 250-grain bullets, I use Ramshot Big Game with 286s, because it provides fine accuracy--and is just as temperature-stable as Varget. For me, that means getting the same velocities and point of impact from zero to around 85-90 Fahrenheit. All powders gain some velocity above about 85-90, how much depending on the powder--but "temp-stable" powders gain less. Have not had the same consistent results with some other powders suggested, such as Reloder 15. The question was RE: a specific powder/bullet weight/muzzle velocity, for a specified reason. Just asked about the net powder capacity. Garandimal might want to use Varget because he has some, and powders are often scarcer these days. But I just checked several websites for Big Game, and only one didn't have it in stock--and in fact one of the sites that did is offering a sale price. Specified exactly why it was selected. Thanks for nothin', John. GR He’s got you pegged, doesn’t he! 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 What a Twatwaffle! Asks a stupid question like how "much powder fits..." Varget won't leave a lot of room for crazy stuff, but one can compress... Why does "fit" matter? MD is 100% Weird question. Loading density, max load, min load, typically accurate load, favorite load... all make sense. What "fits"?🤔🤔
Parents who say they have good kids..Usually don't!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,330 Likes: 1
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,330 Likes: 1 |
I can’t decide if garand animal is just a dick or has mental problems.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 60,138 Likes: 10
Campfire Kahuna
|
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 60,138 Likes: 10 |
Dillonbuck,
Along with the type of bullet, the amount of powder that might "fit" also depends on the brand of brass, and length of the magazine. The 9.3x62 was designed to fit in the standard K-98 Mauser magazine, the reason the "standard" overall length is 3.29 inches--but today many commercial rifles feature ".30-06" length magazines, which are generally around 3.4" long. Since the chamber throat is very long, it's easy to seat bullets out a little more in such rifles. For my CZ 550, 286-grain Partitions are loaded to an overall length of 3.41 inches--which allows about 3 more grains of powder to "fit" in the case.
Yet another factor that might affect how much Varget could be used is the particular lot of powder. I already mentioned how I generally load Varget with 250-grain bullets in the 9.3x62, but after working up my initial load (60.5 grains) bought another 8-pound jug of Varget and found the charge had to be increased to 62.0 grains to match the muzzle velocity of the first load. This much variation between batches isn't uncommon in smokeless rifle powders packaged for handloaders, which are commonly blended with older lots of varying burn rates to provide a more consistent product.
Another factor is pressure. The "modern" SAAMI Maximum Average Pressure for the 9.3x62 is 57,500 PSI, measured by piezo electronics, but the CIP (European) max is 56,565. When I started working with the 9.3x62 it seemed to me that .30-06 pressures would be safe enough, since they're not all that hot, and the 9.3x62 is sort of a 9.3-06 Improved.
A strain gauge (also an electronic measurement) showed the pressures in my handloads to be right around 60,000 PSI, the .30-06's MAP. So pressures might also affect how much Varget would "fit" with 286s.
“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.”
John Steinbeck
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2016
Posts: 3,058
Campfire Tracker
|
|
OP
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Dec 2016
Posts: 3,058 |
Dillonbuck,
Along with the type of bullet, the amount of powder that might "fit" also depends on the brand of brass, and length of the magazine. The 9.3x62 was designed to fit in the standard K-98 Mauser magazine, the reason the "standard" overall length is 3.29 inches--but today many commercial rifles feature ".30-06" length magazines, which are generally around 3.4" long. Since the chamber throat is very long, it's easy to seat bullets out a little more in such rifles. For my CZ 550, 286-grain Partitions are loaded to an overall length of 3.41 inches--which allows about 3 more grains of powder to "fit" in the case.
Yet another factor that might affect how much Varget could be used is the particular lot of powder. I already mentioned how I generally load Varget with 250-grain bullets in the 9.3x62, but after working up my initial load (60.5 grains) bought another 8-pound jug of Varget and found the charge had to be increased to 62.0 grains to match the muzzle velocity of the first load. This much variation between batches isn't uncommon in smokeless rifle powders packaged for handloaders, which are commonly blended with older lots of varying burn rates to provide a more consistent product.
Another factor is pressure. The "modern" SAAMI Maximum Average Pressure for the 9.3x62 is 57,500 PSI, measured by piezo electronics, but the CIP (European) max is 56,565. When I started working with the 9.3x62 it seemed to me that .30-06 pressures would be safe enough, since they're not all that hot, and the 9.3x62 is sort of a 9.3-06 Improved.
A strain gauge (also an electronic measurement) showed the pressures in my handloads to be right around 60,000 PSI, the .30-06's MAP. So pressures might also affect how much Varget would "fit" with 286s. It was a simple question of % volume load for that powder. Ogive for 286 gr. .366" may differ a little, so the answer may have required an entire extra line to address both spitzer and round nose bullets, although sptizer is by far the most common. "I don't know," would have been an acceptable answer. GR
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2016
Posts: 3,058
Campfire Tracker
|
|
OP
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Dec 2016
Posts: 3,058 |
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
What a Twatwaffle!
Asks a stupid question like how "much powder fits..."
Varget won't leave a lot of room for crazy stuff, but one can compress...
Why does "fit" matter? MD is 100% Weird question.
Loading density, max load, min load, typically accurate load, favorite load...
all make sense. What "fits"?🤔🤔 "Fit," bug-wit, matters as to how much powder can be used in the load... which determines the velocity of the load. GR
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2018
Posts: 1,017
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Mar 2018
Posts: 1,017 |
In my experience case capacity is largely a function of the manufacturer. Remington is usually about equal to military brass and typically has the least capacity. Then Federal and Winchester which are similar. Hornady has more capacity than the first three, and finally Norma has the most. I haven't had much experience with Lapua brass to know where they fit in this analysis, but I've heard they're good and I'd like to get my mits on some soon. I didn't see the brass manufacturer in the original post, so it's hard to say until we know whose brass we're talking about.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2016
Posts: 125
Campfire Member
|
Campfire Member
Joined: Sep 2016
Posts: 125 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2019
Posts: 2,517
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jun 2019
Posts: 2,517 |
Garandimal,
Why don't you just place a mark on the case neck of your brass corresponding to the base of whatever bullet you plan to shoot at whatever OAL you plan to load it to. Transfer this mark to the inside of the neck. Pour Varget into the case until it just covers that mark. Then pour that Varget out into your powder pan and weigh it. That'll be your 100% fill charge, and the actions described will only require a fraction of the time you've spent with this thread.
The answer you derive will of course have no relation to whether or not that is a safe charge to load but you have been pretty clear that all you care about is how much powder will fit under a bullet.
Rex
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,631
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,631 |
Lets not cloud this issue with reason and logic.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2016
Posts: 3,058
Campfire Tracker
|
|
OP
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Dec 2016
Posts: 3,058 |
Garandimal,
Why don't you just place a mark on the case neck of your brass corresponding to the base of whatever bullet you plan to shoot at whatever OAL you plan to load it to. Transfer this mark to the inside of the neck. Pour Varget into the case until it just covers that mark. Then pour that Varget out into your powder pan and weigh it. That'll be your 100% fill charge, and the actions described will only require a fraction of the time you've spent with this thread.
The answer you derive will of course have no relation to whether or not that is a safe charge to load but you have been pretty clear that all you care about is how much powder will fit under a bullet.
Rex Haven't got the powder yet. Originally, was goin' to load to 2500 fps/MV w/ Big Game (take a bow, John). Need ~ 8-lbs, and it's the only cartridge that will use it. So, what I'm tryin' to do is determine powder suitability. The new (+/-) 2400 fps/MV spec should allow a single-based, temp stable powder instead of the Dbl-based Big Game, as well as be more suitable for reduced loads and lighter, 250 gr. bullets. ... IF, I can get enough powder in to meet the spec. Hence the simple question. GR
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2016
Posts: 3,058
Campfire Tracker
|
|
OP
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Dec 2016
Posts: 3,058 |
In my experience case capacity is largely a function of the manufacturer. Remington is usually about equal to military brass and typically has the least capacity. Then Federal and Winchester which are similar. Hornady has more capacity than the first three, and finally Norma has the most. I haven't had much experience with Lapua brass to know where they fit in this analysis, but I've heard they're good and I'd like to get my mits on some soon. I didn't see the brass manufacturer in the original post, so it's hard to say until we know whose brass we're talking about. It's more a case of gross disparity. Hodgdon's Reloading Data Center - lists 59.0C grns./VARGET for 2350 fps., so maybe ~ 60.8C grns. would get it to 2400 fps.
Nosler's Load Data site - shows 55.5 grns./VARGET having a 99% Load Density. Call it a 3 grain spread. The Hodgdon number will work or get close enough, while the Nosler number would be a stretch, and maybe a different powder will work better. VARGET - is the first choice, but don't want to end up w/ 8-pounds a useless or sub-optimal powder. Will probably go w/ it anyway, as it should work good enough and meets to rest of the spec, but figured that the Know-it-All's here might be able to shed some light on the issue. GR
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 30,935 Likes: 1
Campfire 'Bwana
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 30,935 Likes: 1 |
If I were loading tge 9.3-62 I would use CFE223 instead of Varget. CFE223 gets more velocity in the 35 Whelen than Varget at equal or lower pressure.
I got banned on another web site for a debate that happened on this site. That's a first
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2016
Posts: 3,058
Campfire Tracker
|
|
OP
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Dec 2016
Posts: 3,058 |
If I were loading tge 9.3-62 I would use CFE223 instead of Varget. CFE223 gets more velocity in the 35 Whelen than Varget ate equal or lower pressure. Looks to be a similar burn rate, but is a spherical, double-based powder, that also looks the be fairly temp sensitive. Like the "Extreme" powders for this load, if it will meet the spec. Thanks. GR
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2018
Posts: 1,017
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Mar 2018
Posts: 1,017 |
If you're using the same brand of cases as Nosler, which happens to be Nosler, and you're using the same Nosler 286gr bullet seated to the same length as their specs show, then the easy answer is 56gr of Varget. Nosler says 55.5grs takes up 99% of case capacity, so you need 1% more to reach 100%. Whether or not you should actually try this load is another story that can only be answered by the OP. After all, it would be 1/2 grain over specification, and probably not worth the hassle of dealing with out of spec ammo for no more performance then can be gained by a half grain.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 60,138 Likes: 10
Campfire Kahuna
|
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 60,138 Likes: 10 |
Garandimal,
Why don't you pose your questions in normal rifle-loony language? You asked about case-fill, then claim you meant all the usual stuff--such as what loads various people are actually using with Varget.
And then, per usual, you start to object to the answers you get--as I suggested when explaining why I didn't respond. Which obviously means you think you know all about it already.
Which of course brings up the question: Why did you ask in the first place?
“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.”
John Steinbeck
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 2,139
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 2,139 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2022
Posts: 26
Campfire Greenhorn
|
|
Campfire Greenhorn
Joined: Jul 2022
Posts: 26 |
In my 64 years of shooting, 54 yrs of hand loading for my 200+ owned during that time and a number of friends pieces as well, I have read most gun writers from the USA, Canada and some other countries. I find JB to be the best overall with practical advice for my uses and he DOES NOT constantly inflict the sort of braggadocio on we readers that so many gun "scribes" indulge in. This, is a welcome respite from the chest thumping that bores me to distraction.
Last edited by Otto1217; 10/24/22.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 60,138 Likes: 10
Campfire Kahuna
|
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 60,138 Likes: 10 |
Randy, That's been my conclusion. But good to know you've come to the same conclusion! Did you go out elking this interesting weekend? John
“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.”
John Steinbeck
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 17,898 Likes: 7
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 17,898 Likes: 7 |
I sometimes wonder if garandimal and synoptic are run by the same puppeteer.
|
|
|
|
|
607 members (007FJ, 1936M71, 160user, 12344mag, 16penny, 17CalFan, 58 invisible),
2,408
guests, and
1,290
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,192,141
Posts18,484,085
Members73,966
| |
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|
