Guys:

Maybe this is an odd question, but is there any way to force a rifle to shoot a particular bullet that it initially "doesn't like"? I have a bunch of 154-grain Interlocks that I'd like to use, but the rifle I want to use them in doesn't particularly "like" them with any of the three or four load combinations I've tried. Is it just a matter of continuing to try different combinations of powder, seating depth, etc? Or is it a case of the rifle saying, "Nope, ain't gonna do it regardless of what you try"?

Thanks

RM

Not a gun writer for sure, but I've had this experience.

In my limited experience, I believe there are some bullet/barrel combinations (probably a lot actually) that are just not compatible (aside from the obvious cases of bullet and twist recommendations) and you will shoot a barrel out trying to make it work.

It sounds like a great excuse to find a new rifle that those bullets would be the cats pajamas in and give it a whirl.

I reckon it goes without saying that you have checked your brass for neck wall thickness consistency, and your loaded ammo for concentricity/straightness?
I recall Mule Deer's story about an early rifle of his that really "liked" Spire Points (IIRC), and he subsequently learned one of the reasons was those bullets fit his die's seating stem very well, and seated super straight.
I look forward to the answers folks post here as it is certainly very desirable to pick the bullet that suits your purposes and then make it shoot.

Cheers,
Rex

Are you sure your die seats that particular bullet straight?

Good question. From the eye-ball method of rolling a cartridge, yes; however, I am going to pick up a new Redding concentricity gauge as soon as they're more readily available.

Sinclair has theirs in stock.

Thanks, I'll check it out.

You could try seating at the lands or jamming a bit, and also backing waaay off the lands. Varying pressure/velocity significantly between test loads may yield some answers as well. There are a lot of vagueries of chamber and throating geometry that don't jibe well with the shapes of certain bullets. Making sure your ammo is straight is a good start toward getting any bullet to shoot well.

Try different seating depth.

What kind of accuracy are you getting now with the 154's?

A lot of it depends on how you quantify “doesn’t like”. Is it that you expect sub one inch groups and you’re getting consistent 1.5-2”? Or is the bullet utterly inconsistent?

I’d look at getting the bullet seated straight, play with the seating depth and check the bedding. For seating depth I start at max length for the magazine and then seater deeper by five or ten thousandths are a time until it starts grouping well. You can seat it out to the lands but if that’s longer than the magazine will allow you have a single shot.

Thanks for the comments so far. I have a question to follow-up based (seating depth v. powder charge), but will wait for other suggestions.

Thanks again.

I dodged the same problem once by altering the shape of the bullet. Filed the exposed lead tips off changed a spire point bullet from a mediocre performer to a good one. (I then made a file trim die to consistently alter the bullets in future.)

Probably not germane to your root issues, but a suggestion that it may be time to think outside the box. That or sell the bullets and buy something else the gun likes. Life is too short after all to devote much time to fretting about such stuff.

I use the Berger method for load development. It hasn’t failed me yet and I don’t use Bergers. BT, Partition, TTSX, ELD-X, AccuBond, it all works.

From their website:

Solution

The following has been verified by numerous shooters in many rifles using bullets of different calibers and weights. It is consistent for all VLD bullets. What has been discovered is that VLD bullets shoot best when loaded to a COAL that puts the bullet in a “sweet spot”. This sweet spot is a band .030 to .040 wide and is located anywhere between jamming the bullets into the lands and .150 jump off the lands.

Note: When discussing jam and jump I am referring to the distance from the area of the bearing surface that engages the rifling and the rifling itself. There are many products that allow you to measure these critical dimensions. Some are better than others. I won’t be going into the methods of measuring jam and jump. If you are not familiar with this aspect of reloading it is critically important that you understand this concept before you attempt this test.

Many reloaders feel (and I tend to agree) that meaningful COAL adjustments are .002 to .005. Every once in a while I might adjust the COAL by .010 but this seems like I am moving the bullet the length of a football field. The only way a shooter will be able to benefit from this situation is to let go of this opinion that more than .010 change is too much (me included).

Trying to find the COAL that puts you in the sweet spot by moving .002 to .010 will take so long the barrel may be worn out by the time you sort it out if you don’t give up first. Since the sweet spot is .030 to .040 wide we recommend that you conduct the following test to find your rifles VLD sweet spot.

Load 24 rounds at the following COAL if you are a target competition shooter who does not worry about jamming a bullet:
1. .010 into (touching) the lands (jam) 6 rounds
2. .040 off the lands (jump) 6 rounds
3. .080 off the lands (jump) 6 rounds
4. .120 off the lands (jump) 6 rounds

Load 24 rounds at the following COAL if you are a hunter (pulling a bullet out of the case with your rifling while in the field can be a hunt ending event which must be avoided) or a competition shooter who worries about pulling a bullet during a match:
1. .010 off the lands (jump) 6 rounds
2. .050 off the lands (jump) 6 rounds
3. .090 off the lands (jump) 6 rounds
4. .130 off the lands (jump) 6 rounds

Shoot 2 (separate) 3 shot groups in fair conditions to see how they group. The remarkable reality of this test is that one of these 4 COALs will outperform the other three by a considerable margin. Once you know which one of these 4 COAL shoots best then you can tweak the COAL +/- .002 or .005. Taking the time to set this test up will pay off when you find that your rifle is capable of shooting the VLD bullets very well (even at 100 yards).

A concentricity gauge can go a long ways to resolving your question.

I have both the Sinclair and the RCBS. Buy the one that’s the cheapest.

If I were shooting piggies at rock-throwing distances, I’d not sweat group size. Just saying....

Or use them in a rifle that likes them. You’ve got more than one 7mm, right?

Uh...yeah...I’m about to make it No. 9. 😁

I do what others suggest but sometimes it still won't work. I would try another bullet or even a factory load to establish a baseline for accuracy. Concentricity is number one, then seating depth, then powder charge, then primers. I usually stop there but occasionally fool around with neck tension or go to a different type of brass. I will check neck wall thickness and cull first before going to neck turning.

Some times it is an odd solution like JB has recommended trying a faster powder with Nosler Partitions to get better obturation.

The 154 Hornaday has shot well in all the rifles I have tried them in. I would weigh about ten or so to see if you got a mixed batch. But maybe easier and more productive to try a different bullet. I have also thought I had bad bullets and it turned out to be the scope, bedding, screw tightness or looseness or you name it.

I am amazed at how many rifles shoot better when backing off the lands. A few years ago closer the better was the thought. Of course every rifle is different but if I don’t see good results quickly I start backing away.
GreggH

Rev, what does it shoot well?

DF

Pharmseller nailed it.

After finding a primer/powder combination that gives desired velocities and consistent single digit SD's. The only thing you have left is seating depth. I have had success with depths varying from 0.005 to 0.2 off the lands.

This is of course after rifle mechanics are verified bedding, scope and attachments. Also good reloading techniques , such as bullet runout which is a major factor. Thanks MD!

I’m not sure if this is a fix, but factory barrels often like only one bullet weight best, however lapped custom barrels tend to shoot all weights well.

Maybe have the barrel checked by a smith that knows how to lap a barrel, and have them lap it if it’s got any tight spots, or is rough and it may make it shoot more like a custom lapped barrel.

You didn't say Rev, but if you are talking about the 154 gr Hornady in the 7x57...welcome to the club. I tried and tried, would become discouraged, doubting my rifle and my ability, I would go back to a 160 gr by any other maker, and shoot a 5 shot near moa group. I just gave up.

160-grain Partitions.

I think you just answered the question I was going to ask about powder charges. Find the velocity node first, then start adjusting the seating depth, correct?

Yep, that's the cartridge.

I should add: and 175-grain Hornady RN IL.

Sinclair is my choice and I use a TruAngle tool to correct runout.

http://www.trutool-equipment.com/

I set mine up on a board, easier to store and handy to use.

DF


Edited to add, I got a Tee Nut at ACE Hdw. to attach TruAngle tool to a board. Works great, drill a hole, easy to do.

What powder(s) and have you tried a slightly faster one for the 154?

DF

Hunter and Big Game. I haven't tried 4350 yet, but plan to.

Dang right, I have, and it/they will, have a pre-64 FWT 243 that WAS a cantankerous little b-tch, it did NOT want to shoot the 100gr Partition, after three powders and a couple different col settings, it's happily living in my gun safe firing those partitions at 2952 fps over a charge of imr-4350 powder.

RevMike,

I've had luck with this exact delima in the past, especially with cup and core bullets.

For me, the trick is to load a wide variety of powders, with a good range of burn rates.

Also very your powder types, stick vs. spherical, and primer choices, something hot, something cold, as well.

Don't do a full workup with anything. Start with about 5 powders at minimum loads and max usable OAL, and if something shows promise, go from there.

Of course, Mono's are a totally different process.

Monos different? you can say that again, have seated those deep and drove em hard enough to loosen primer pockets, only to find that's where they shot the best!

I’ve written about this episode before here but I’ll repeat myself in this case. I love anything Nosler...it’s my preferred choice. I found a beautiful Pre 64 70 in 270 a few years back and couldn’t wait to see what she would do, as every Pre 64 has shot lights out for me. Flawless bore, glass beaded well, a good, proven, Leupold scope on it.

She shot like crap with all he usual & customary 270 loads appropriate for their 140 grain bullet. She “two grouped” or shot improved cylinder with every load combination, seating depth, etc. Runout was fine. Rebedded it three times, tried three good scopes.

I was about to trade her off, but on a whim tried H-4831 with a 140 grain VLD and a 140 grain Sierra Game Changer. H-4831 was one of the powders tried earlier to no avail. With no attention to seating depth, I just seated em a smidge longer than factory. Bam! Both loads shot right at two tenths of an inch at 100! I repeated the loads and they shot itty bitty tight clusters once again. I snuck in some 140 grain BT’s into the mix to see what would happen and she snarled back at me again, two grouping @ about 2 1/2”.

I talked with my favorite accuracy gunsmith and he said they run into that occasionally....it’s not uncommon. He thinks a contributing factor could be the leade angle in the individual rifle’s chamber, but added that wouldn’t be the reason every time. Some rifles just don’t like some bullets I suppose. I just use the FIDO principle...forget it and drive on.

Yep, jump'em and crank'em....

They tend to work well pushed pretty hard...

And if you think you're jumping them enough, increase the jump...

Let the target do the talking...

DF

I have had pretty good luck with 154 gr RN Hornady with 4320 in my 93 mauser. The old mausers were long throated for the 175 gr rn bullets. Your gun has been telling you that with the 160 npt's and 175 gr hornady take the hint. Play with your seating depth till you get what you want. Check your run out. God will forgive your errors. MB

LOL, damn right DF!

I've read they've discontinued 4320. That's too bad, as it's a good powder.

I'd check the burn rate charts for those pretty close to 4320.

DF

This chidt isnt hard or complicated. If I "let the target do the talking", which I do, it would say, you arent using a whole bunch of me, but you sure are tearing the fu ck out of my orange dot!!!!! To answer the op, hornady bullets are and have always been easy to get to shoot well. Keep trying

Mart, Great response. You are a seasoned Alaskan hunter who understands practical accuracy. The bat sht-crazy obsession for accuracy gets old.

Point at a jug of powder, a certain weight bullet that is proper to your rate of rifling twist, load them up and go hunting.

.030 off the lands n grooves is some cliche, parroted bullsht. It doesnt apply to wvery caliber.

Less chamber pressure, especially above 30 cal, if you seat them a little deeper into the case.

I had a box of defective hornady 200 grain 35 cal interlok. Some were softpoints, some were fmj's. Hornady never offered fmj's in that caliber at that weight.

They were very inaccurate. I saved the fmj's for wolf and fox, since they hit same poi. The soft points were used for moose.

Surrounded by a few thousand hornady brass and reloading bullets, none of it is precise stuff. But neither are my bugger cockeyed 77's (ruger hawkeye 77).

I'll bitch about it, but later in the week, use them for hunting. The severe shortages have changed me!

Accuracy wise in descending order of importance. (Aside from shooting the bullet you want that is.. )

the 3-4 B’s

Barrel (bore, rifling, chambering & ammo)
Bedding
Bolt (and trigger)
Behind the butt (the person shooting knowing how to hold the gun & support the rifle & themself)


No body shoots good with a Bad barrel, or bedding, some folks can shoot with a heavy trigger others can’t...
If you are a real ELR nut then getting your heart to slow and or stop for a couple of seconds really helps.

The throat on this particular rifle measures .2495 inches, virtually identical to the throat on my MRC (.2500"). Although much maligned here on the 'fire, my MRC is both very reliable and very accurate with just about any bullet weight I've tried, even the 154-gr Interlock. Maybe this other 7x57 is just finicky. I'll figure it out.

Thanks for all the replies. They've been helpful.

It's good to have more accuracy than you need, than to need more accuracy than you have....

DF

Amen to that.

Sometimes rifles can be finicky in many ways.Barrel harmonics can make bullets that will shoot well,shoot really lousy unless you find the right powder.I had been working recently with a couple of Sako A7 rifles that would just not group all that great.One was a 30-06,the other a 308 Win.Both rifles were averaging to be about 1.5-2.0" shooters.Quite frustrating to say the least.I worked with several powders in both rifles and found one load and only one load that shot really well around .5" in the 30-06.The 308 Win would never shoot that great no matter what I tried.Both these rifles had floated barrels.I bedded the lugs and tangs and it really didn't seem to help.One day at the range I was about ready to give up on both these rifle.I tried sliding folded sheets of paper under the barrel to support it,from the recoil lug all the way to the end of the forearm of the stock.I watched my groups shrink with both rifles with several different loads that they would not shoot well before.I contacted warranty on the rifles and they sent me a different stock for the 30-06 that has a full length metal block that supports the action.The problem I figured out on both those rifles was Even though I had bedded the lugs and tangs,the action was flexing behind the recoil lugs when shot.Those stocks are both composite but neither had a full length metal block to support the action and were kinda flimsy in that open part of the stock.They both have detachable magazines.The latch that locks in the magazine is located right behind the recoil lug.The stock is inletted a little wider for the latch making it weaker.Since warranty was sending me a better stock for the 30-06,I JB Welded a piece of hacksaw blade on each side of the stock where it was inletted for the latch and it stiffened the stock quite a bit.I took it to the range and it shot under .5".The 308 Win I ended up full length bedding the barrel channel of the stock.It now shoots every load I've tried very well now,one was .15".That's a huge difference on both rifles.I see this quite often with rifles.Get the bedding right and it makes a really big difference.Get that corrected if it is a problem,then when you work on your load development with powders,seating depths and bullets,your life gets much easier.Another thing I've noticed is,try powders on the fast end,mid point and slow end powders of the load data for that rifle and bullet.Usually you can see a big difference in point of impact of the bullet with the different powder ranges.This is because of how the powders are affecting the barrel harmonics.The different powders may each group the bullets well,but they may be inches apart.Usually I'll select one that shows good potential and play with my load charge and seating depth to see if it improves a bit.Sometimes it's easy to figure out how to get them to shoot,then sometimes you just can't crack the nut.Some bullets are just plain difficult too.Good Luck with the challenge.

7x57’s can sometimes be a tad finicky. So can the Swede.

To me the 7-08 is less cranky, the Creed the least. Have worked with all 4 from time to time.

I’m sure that’s not gonna influence your thinking about your fav round. I like it, too. Those old rounds have a lot of class, no doubt.

DF

What is the make of this particular rifle? If this rifle shoots a 160 gr Partition to your satisfaction then the mechanics of the rifle and scope are OK. You must have missed it in a few threads discussing the 7x57. When all else fails, try member Seafire's load of 40 grs IMR 3031.

Yes, with all of todays information available, it is very easy to pick a powder to get desired velocity, temp resistance, powder measuring, and even decoppering. Whatever your preference.
After doing my homework, I rarely have to try a different powder. Maybe switch primers, and almost always tweak seating depth.

Good stuff. Never too old to learn.

if you said these were RN or Spire Points, I missed it.

I thought Ron said you were on a super secret mission hunting the Taliban in the mountains outside Flagstaff?

I'll throw a couple thoughts in here.

One is DBC. Dynatech Bore Coat can really change the game. I have one rifle that never shot consistently well with anything. It had good days and bad, and it required 5 -8 shots after a good cleaning before it would settle down and actually group. DBC came along and smoothed all that out.

The other idea is that it may or may not have been the DBC. It may have been the down-to-the-metal cleaning that I had to do to prep the rifle for DBC.

I'm now starting my 6th season with that rifle post DBC, and I recently shot my best group ever with it.

Sometimes I think that it would be a lot simpler to just pick up a 7-08 or pull out my old .260 and make life a lot easier.



It's a M70 Featherweight (not the Ingwe Special). I've not tried Seafire's load, but he's mentioned it in several threads over time, so if I can't get the 154s to shoot using 4350 (which I haven't tried yet) I just might. I've been trying to get it to shoot using the Ramshot powders since I have quite a bit of it for use in some Deep Curl loads.




Spire Points.

I'm off to the lease for the weekend. Again, thanks for all the comments as they've been helpful.

finally, you've found your life's purpose.

too bad it's on the internet.......

Too bad one of youse guys with too much money doesn't buy a Juenke Internal Concentricity Comparator and spin some of these bullets. Our method of substituting components when you factor 6 brands of primers, 6 brands of brass, 30 or so powders, ten increments of charge weight...we're looking at almost 11,000 thousand possible combinations. Talk about the lottery odds.

There aren't too many of them floating around.

I had a Juenke machine loaned to me for several years, maybe a decade ago. Experimented with it a LOT--and one of the things I discovered during those years was that while yes, some hunting bullets really sucked, but very few sucked ALL the time. Except for the very bad ones, they could vary from lot to lot, with some batches being far more accurate than others, both on the Juenke and at the range.

Also discovered that some bullet companies were using Juenke machines to develop bullets, and refine their manufacturing processes. Other companies consistently making very accurate bullets often did it without the help of a Juenke machine, by making everything very consistently, and replacing bullet-forming dies far more often than other companies.

The machine I used was owned by one of the magazine publishers I worked for, and after a while they wanted it sent to a bullet company, so I did. Vern offered to sell me one at a discount, as my article on it had stirred up some business for him, but by that time I didn't feel the need, as so many bullet companies were making consistently accurate bullets.

Nothing to do with the OP, but in 1967, I hit Saturn Rifles on Commercial Row in Reno, up for a job, either Juenke himself or maybe a shop foreman told me, "Why would we pay you, when we can get these kids out of gunsmithing colleges to work for free?" So I showed 'em, I went logging. Bet they still regret that. Grin.

Exactly how did the Juenke machine work?

It used ultra-sound to measure the variances in jacket thickness--and hence bullet balance. The bullet was rotated by a small electric motor, and the sensor gave a needle-reading on a gauge, indicating variations in jacket thickness, and hence bullet balance. The readings corresponded very well with target results.

However, it only worked on jacketed bullets, since it couldn't "read" any difference in monolithic bullets, whether lead or copper-based. Thought obviously if concentrically cast or turned they shouldn't have balance problems.

Here is Ken Juenkes company Email [email protected] There was a post from 2017 that he was going to produce the machines again.