I'm hoping Larry does a thorough testing with pressure curves and all.Originally Posted by 243winxb
Joe
|
   
   
|
|
I'm hoping Larry does a thorough testing with pressure curves and all.
Joe
It won't mean anything until he gets the load with accuracy established and uses that particular load. A repeat of the RPM testing setup would give bad data.
Let's not discourage him, I really want to see the pressure curves. BaBore does too and possibly a host of others. Larry has some pretty good testing equipment and in my opinion goes a few steps further in his test...most just give a velocity.
Joe
I for one am not convinced that the pressure trace data is accurate. Now if someone wants to do , and post it, fine. Just don't expect everyone to swallow hook, line and sinker aqnd keep repeating it as gospel.
Charter Member #148
Well Scot, not all posters even post velocities. Strain gauges are pretty good. Some pressure reading are better then none at all. I'll have to admit Larry's Oehler chrono is the Lexus of chronographs.
I'm tired of being negative.
Joe
Not trying to be negative here Joe, but also not trying to be led astray by inacurrate information. I believe what he hhas is M43 Personal Balistics Lab and yes by Oehler.
Charter Member #148
45 2.1
Thank you for the answer, it is most helpful. I do not have that filler in my first set of test loads. I have BPI's #47 and I will still test the loads. I will also order some "original" for the next test.
Joe
Do your (or 45 2.1) have any experience with #47? I do appreciate your positive attitude, thanks.
swheeler
Let me say the Oehler M43 PBL is a fine piece of equipment and we should remember that Dr. Oehler provides pressure measuring equipment to the ammuntion industry. His equipment, including the M43, is very reliable. He has conducted tests in comparisong with the other standard pressure measuring devices and compared them with his own. These were all hooked to the same pressure gun. Thus all the devices measured the pressure of the same shot. The M43 was as reliable and consistant as any and actually ranked with the best and most expensive. I take great pains to follow the procedures and enter correct data. I also use factory ammuntion as a "reference". I also have contacted Federal and Winchester who were kind enough to provide their test data for specific lots of .308W ammuntion that I had. The results I obtained using a new test barrel of the same twist were well with in the difference expected between that barrel and a minimum spec SAAMI test barrel. Thus the M43 is measuring pressures as expected. To ensure that I take my time and so the set up is correct and I shoot a test string out of my standard test rifle with one lot of ammuntion that is my standard "reference ammuntion. So far the M43 has always recorded velocities and pressures consistent within the variations expected and the variation of conditions. After the "reference" test and I know all is well with the set up and conditions I then conduct the test. That is also why I have not tested the loads yet; the weather is raining, cold and blustery and not of the conditions I prefer. I will wait for better conditions.
I currently have strain gauges attached to 22 different firearms of 17 different cartridges. Obviously I have gained some experience in the use of the M43. I have found it's results to be consistent. I also do not expect nor want anyone to take any pressures I post as "gospel". I would expect every reloader to work up loads as always because the conditions and firearm used will be different than mine. This is the same with all ammuntion manufacturers and with the reloading manuals. Do we really think our pressures will be exactly the same as theirs? I think not or at least we shouldn't. Every one of them says something to the effect of; this is what we got, your pressures will be somewhat different so always work up your loads. It's not any different here. I will tell you of the pressures as I measured them, what you do with that information is up to you. If you choose to consider it "inaccurate" then that is your choice but the question then begs; what do you base your supposition of inaccuracy on and do you have something that measures pressures better?
Larry Gibson
Larry,
No I haven't tried that product. I believe the first buffer I bought, which I don't see sold anymore, was from Grafs and it was predominantly a white material with dark grey or black specs of something else in it. It wasn't the same as the original buffer I just posted here and use now. I can't tell you what 45 2.1 all experimented with as I don't know.
When you get that sweet spot I'm very interested in all your data (velocities, pressures, and pressure curves) unless you're going to go ahead and test was experimenting.
Joe
Try this Joe-
http://forums.accuratereloading.com/...3/m/9111088411
Charter Member #148
Scot,
I don't care what they are talking about. I still want to see Larry chart all this. He can also chart to show us the BC. It's taken a lot to get this thread going. It looks like it will be the first successful HV 6.5 thread that won't be locked out because of inflammatory arguing. It did have a little bit of a rocky start, but I was able to work that out. So let's try to keep it going. I've tried to post this without stepping on any toes and hope I've succeeded.
Joe
I just thought it was interesting, thats all. By all means carry on boss.
Charter Member #148
Thank you for posting the "missing link".
I've followed these threads on the 6.5mm, gave up several times, and then gotten hooked again. This time, I went so far as to form some 50 to 70 6.5x55 cases from LC67Match 30-06 military brass, but balked at springing for the neck turner on Monday when I placed my bi-annual order to Midway. Just didn't think anyone would 'give it up' so I didn't want to waste the money. Just learning the forming steps was fun, but it's still going to be a while before I try the 6.5 with cast. Between the neck turner, pilots, Lyman "M" die, opening up the seater to accept .269"-.270" dia boolits, it's just more time & money than what I want to try right now - besides, I've got lots of 357max, 444, 44Mag HP, 45ACP HP loads to work up.
But, once I get caught up, I'll let my 1902 CG Swed Mauser have a go at it.
I would like to add a thanks to all who are posting information on the subject. I am very interested in this thread and am looking forward to Larry's results.
Having said that, I feel guilty sitting at my computer waiting for someone else to do all the work. All who are contributing have spent a lot of time, effort and money developing information that the rest of us are eager to put to use. Particularly in this case Larry who will be burning up time and supplies shooting and presenting results for all of us.
Is there anything I can do to help out? I would not have any objection to helping subsidize the cost of components for the tests.
Please let me know if I can help out in any way.
Longbow
swheeler
The problem with the results from that test is the total lack of set up information on load, the rifle, and the test conditions. There is further information within the thread itself which casts considerable doubt on the accuracy of the data.
The reason I state that is in Kelbo's second post he states; "That Federal factory ammo only reading 41K seems pretty low". There is the "reference ammunition" and the low psi reading is telling us something is definately out of whack in the set up. My tests of Federal ammo (unknown what type of .223 ammo they were using - another poor posting of data) gives pressures in the 53-56K psi range - just where they are supposed to be. The fact that the reference ammuntion MAP psi in the test was so low is definately telling us something is amiss.
My guess is the test rifle was a bolt action based on the low psi reading of the Federal factory ammo. If so therein lies the problem. Per the instructions for the M43 the strain gauge must be mounted on the barrel over the chamber. On bolt actions the receiver ring covers the chamber of the short .223 cartridge. Thus if Kelbro did mount the strain gauge on the barrel it is measuring bore pressure not chamber pressure. That explains the 41K psi for the Federal factory and the corresponding low pressure readings during the test. I do not use a bolt action for my M43 tests of the .223 Rem/5.56 NATO and my pressure readings are very much in line with factory and arsenal pressures.
I also have asked to conduct the the same type test using a properly set up M43 and test rifle on another thread at that site but Hot Core has refused.
I recently conducted a test of several .223 loads and several Us M193 loads including a box of Winchester white box M193. The Winchester ammo was way over pressure and exhibited much faster velocities per the M43. Using CHE measurements on 10 cases showed no case head expansion. Yet the psi MAP was 65,7K with a velocity of 3351 from the 21" barrel (3150 - 3200 fps is normal for M193 from that barrel). Three factory loads ran from 53 -55K Maps, just where they were supposed to with correct velocity ranges. Four other lots of US M193 and one lot of Canadian M193 had MAPs in the 56 - 60 psi, again just where they were supposed to be with velocities of 3230 - 3270 fps. Thus the high pressures and velocities were not the result of poor readings but were from high pressure. BTW; even with no CHE the primers of the Winchester M193 were much more flattened than the other M193 tested. Hot Core fails to respond to that test and results.
I have also ran several deliberate tests comparing CHE to measured psi from the M43. I have not had a single reliable instance where CHE gave a correct indication of pressure before the pressure was over the top as indicated by swelled or blown primer pockets. I have found that factory pressures can be equaled with PRE if it is done correctly.
Bottom line is the test as conducted was obviously flawed. The facts of that are there in that thread to show it.
Looking like an acceptable day tomorrow for the first test.
Larry Gibson
You have Joe and I suspect there are more than one waiting on Larry's tests.
Take Care
Bob
Its been months since I bought the book, "How to scam people online". It still has not arrived yet!
"If the human population held hands around the equator, a significant portion of them would drown"
Count me as one as well. I'm also waiting for many of us to develop loads using 45 2.1's technique so we can sort of compare notes.
45 2.1, thanks for finally turning the monster loose. I sincerely appreciate your willingness to share the pertinent details of your years of research and experience. I think most of us that have been enquiring are fully aware of the "individual results may vary" implied disclaimer, just like I know my chrono'd loads won't equal published data exactly even in the same make and model of test gun. Too many little differences add up to a different sum. I also rework all my high-pressure (or near maximum) loads each time I make a change of components or particlular lot of a component, and I think the same applies here.
No one who is realistic about reloading will assume you could just give us and exact recipe and it would be universally safe with any gun or any level of experienced reloader.
As to the folks that really don't understand the detailed explanation above, or anyone who thinks they can get good, safe results by shortcutting caseforming or proper neck clearancing, or who are guessing at chamber/leade dimensions, PLEASE DON'T BLOW YOURSELVES UP.
Gear
Mate,I'm really glad I bought the most expensive filler there is only to find out it's the wrong one.I'm glad I've saved alot shooting cast to cover it.I'm a little chuffed to find I was on the right track though. Pat
As stated before and personally to thos involved in parts of this discussion. I appreciate the willingness on their part ot 1) do the method development and testing and 2) to share with us either here on the open forum or behind the scenes by email, phone, etc...
Thanks guys
I think everyone that is watching this discussion with the swede 6.5x55 cartridge should crawl before we run. If we have not gotten good results with conventional low velocity reloading, we probably are not ready to move up to the dissertation level that discussion is aimed at.
6.5 Swede HV; Test 1
I completed the first test of the 6.5 Swede with HV (High Velocity) cast bullet loads using a shotgun buffer as filler. The results while not satisfying were none the less interesting and informative. They will lead to additional testing to be conducted soon. The test rifle is a Mexican SR M98 action that I put a new, in the white milsurp M38 Swede barrel on. The headspace is very tight with factory 6.5x55 ammunition giving a “crush” fit when the bolt is closed. The action is bedded in a Fajen sporter stock with the first couple inches of the barrel bedded. The trigger is smoothed and is a crisp 2 ½ lb pull. The scope is a Tasco World Class 3x9x50 and is set on 9X for the testing. The rifle shoots factory ammo into less than 2 moa for 10 shot strings. With reloads using Sierra or Hornady bullets moa 10 shot groups are common.
The velocity and pressure tests were done with an Oehler M43 PBL. The start screen was 15” from the muzzle. Testing was done at the Tacoma Rifle and revolver Club’s main range. There are very solid cement benches there and I set the M43 up in the same location each time I test there. The set up is also checked by shooting a test string with a test rifle and a known consistent lot of ammunition (referred to a “reference ammunition”). I use a .308W bolt action I have just for this purpose and a specific lot of M118SB that I have obtained. The pre-test check with the test rifle and reference ammunition was well within expected variation so I began the 6.5 tests.
Test conditions; it was an overcast day with no wind to speak of. It was 40 degrees F during the test. Test target was at 100 yards. A front and rear rest were used.
Test loads; I followed 45 2.1’s instructions with the bullets, and equipment I have. I will list here his instructions in italics and under each instruction mention what I did in bold. Also I wish 45 2.1 and starmetal to understand that I am not criticizing anything here. I am only reporting what I’ve done in relation to their instructions, previous statements and claims. My assumption is to take everything at face value and work diligently at getting the same level of accuracy at 2200 fps or so in the 6.5 Swede with 7.9” twist. My testing is far from over so again; I am not criticizing, only reporting and learning.
•The correct (easiest to use, not the only one suitable to use) filler is the Ballistic Products: BP Original design buffer. Be sure it has not been changed from its original properties, i.e. it will NOT flow thru a funnel without help and clumps together when piled up.
I did not have the correct filler as what I got was based on what I had gleaned/guessed at from previous posts/threads and from some PM information. I have BPI’s #47 buffer. It is a plastic buffer and does not flow through a funnel exactly as 45 2.1 describes. In a private conversation with starmetal he had not tried #47 either and was anxious to see if it performed. I conducted this initial test with the #47. I have some of the “original” on order to test when it arrives. If the #47 is not successful at least I will have some load data with several powders to narrow down the test parameters with the original buffer when I get it.
•This filler is not a Do-All in that it has a specific purpose in this and other smaller capacity cartridges. Its purposes are to reduce the cartridge capacity in which it does these things: helps the slow burning powder to achieve it initial ignition pressure by bridging in the case neck/shoulder area thereby increasing initial pressure so that the powder burns very uniformly and evenly; keeps any powder gas off the boolit base along with stopping any gas cutting; compacts into a plastic solid mass which acts as a shock absorber and provides even pressure around the boolit base. After the boolit starts moving the filler plug moves into the neck out of the case thereby increasing case capacity again lowering the pressure buildup. This keeps the pressure lower than any other method I’ve found.
I did not find any evidence that #47 was “compact(ing) into a plastic solid mass”. With all loads tested there was a large “puff” of the filler between the muzzle and the start screen with each shot. Even at the maximum load I stopped at which had 41,600 psi there was no indication the filler was compacting into a solid mass. It may prove different with other powders or with “original” filler, we shall see in future tests. The #47 filler also allows the two powders tested to burn uniformly and evenly.
•To load the Swede correctly, you need to do the previously talked about things such as: reforming military thick necked 30-06 brass along with turning the case neck to 0.001” loaded case chamber clearance, a throat sized cast boolit that fits your rifle, a centered fired formed case, etc. These have been covered in detail before and can be found in the archives.
The brass is well fire formed and necks are trued. Primers used were Remington 9 1/2s. The bullet is a 266455 that drops at .267-.268 when cast of WW/lead 50/50 alloy. The test barrel is .266 in the grooves. The throat is also .266 and an unsized .267 bullet gets shoved back into the case by the chamber throat. I seat the GCs first, then push them nose first into the .266 H die in the 450. The bullets are then lubed in the same .266 H die with LBT Soft Blue lube. The bullet fully dressed weighs right at 130 gr and looks exactly like the one starmetal posted that he got from 45 2.1.
•To actually load the cartridge involves simple hand loading methods. You need dies which will accept the somewhat (0.268”+) boolit. Several die sets will not until altered. You also need a neck expander about 0.001" below your boolit diameter to expand and flare the neck with. It also helps with some powders to taper crimp the case neck lightly.
The case necks are sized in a Redding bushing die giving .001 - .002” tension on the bullets. The bullets are seated so the front driving band is just off the lande. This puts the Top of the GC right at the base of the neck. I use a 7x57 die to seat the over sized bullets. A check on concentricity shows minimal runout (close to the best I get with cast bullets which is .001 - .004”. I did not crimp any of the loads and will include that in the next test.
•Powder selection is fairly simple; you pick a slow for the cartridge powder. That is one which is probably one speed (or more) slower than what is shown in the jacketed data shown for the boolit weight you have. IMR 4350 and AA3100 both work here.
I used 4895 for 3 of the test loads as starmetal had successfully used that in his 6.5MS. The test loads with 4895 were 26, 28 and 30 gr. I then loaded 9 five shot test strings with AA4350 starting at 31 gr. I chose 31 gr because that is what starmetal said was the load on the first 6.5 Swede groups he posted. My test loads went; 31, 33, 36, 38, 40, 42, 44, 46 and 48 gr.
How much powder do you use? Fill the fire formed sized case up to within a dimes thickness of where the body meets the shoulder of the case. Measure that amount and check it against the loading data you have looked at. It should be on the low side of published data, at least for the powders shown. This is where you adjust the load varying the powder charge from that point up to the base of the shoulder.
•How much filler do you use? Conventional wisdom says to fill it to the top of the case neck. If you do this you will NOT get a decent group. This filler DOES NOT like being compressed much. What you do is fill the case to the point where it will compress the thickness of a gas check (that will be just slightly into the base of the neck). You will want to tap the case head a couple of times at this point to make sure it is filled to that point. Seat the boolit and taper crimp slightly.
I filled a case with 4350 as per the instructions and weighed that amount. I then adjusted a Lee powder thrower to throw that weight charge which was 52 gr. Noting the CC amount per the Lee scale I divided that into the powder weight which gave me a constant for how much volume 1 gr of powder was taking in the CC scale of the Lee powder measure. Then I adjusted the Lee to thrown the starting load. Subtracting the reading on the Lee scale for that starting load from the full case reading gave me the volume of filler needed to fill the case with filler. As I adjusted the powder charge up I multiplied the constant times the powder weight and subtracted that from the first filler volume. I found that due to settling of the filler I had to add a tudge to the filler volume. I set up 2 powder throwers; the first was a Lyman 55 to throw the powder and the second was the Lee to throw the filler. It sounds a lot more complicated than it was and I have to admit using 45 2.1 and starmetals names in vain for getting me into such a mess However I soon got the hang of making the adjustments and it went pretty smoothly. I did have to lightly rap the drum screw of the Lee thrower to get the filler to settle evenly into the extension. On the down stroke I also had rap the drum screw about 5-6 times to get the filler to drop into the case.
•This is not dangerous if you have some wits about you, BUT I will not assume any responsibility for what you do either. This cartridge is graduate/PHD level on how to make it work and get it to shoot at jacketed accuracy and velocity, which it will do easily if you know what you’re doing.
•You will have to make adjustments in those powder/filler levels to achieve this. There is a learning curve here. The best way is to post your group pictures along with what you did. The group size and shape will tell what needs to be done.
It definitely took some thinking on getting the right way to make powder and filler amounts come out to 100% density. Once I figured out how to do it with the Lee thrower it was relatively easy.
•You got any questions, then ask because Joe went thru this for awhile before he caught on to how it is properly done.
What taper crimp die are you using 45 2.1?
So with the afore mentioned loads and equipment I was off to the range to test. As stated I had everything set up and did a reference check to ensure all was set and that the M43 was giving proper readings. Now to the “Good, the Bad and the Ugly”;-0
I ran the 4895 test first.
26 gr 4895; produced the best accuracy of any load including the AA4350 loads. Group size was right at 2.2”. Velocity was 2085 fps, SD was 22 and the ES was 56. The MAP was 37,200 psi, the SD 1,300 and the ES 3,300. Bolt lift and extraction were easy.
28 gr 4895; velocity was 2168 fps, SD was 13 and the ES was 29. The MAP was 41,600 psi, the SD was 1,100 and the ES was 2,800. No sign of hard bolt lift.
30 gr 4895; velocity was 2236 fps, SD was 17 and the ES was 40. The MAP was 45,300 psi, SD was 700 and the ES was 1,200. Two of the shots gave hard bolt lift. Both of those shots gave the same puff of filler at the muzzle as the other shots. There was no sign of pressure with any of those shots. Primers were very nicely rounded.
I then tested the AA4350 loads;
31 gr AA4350; velocity was 1965 fps, SD was 22 and the ES was 45. The MAPwas30,500 psi, SD was 800 and the ES was 1,600. No sign of hard bolt lift.
33 gr AA4350; velocity was 2047 fps, SD was 7 and the ES was 14. The MAP was 31,900 psi, SD was 1,100 and the ES was 20. No hard bolt lift.
36 gr AA4350; velocity was 2167 fps, SD was 6 and the ES 17. The MAP was 36,100 psi, the SD 700 and the ES 1,600. No hard bolt lift.
38 gr AA4350; velocity was 2252 fps, SD was 24 and ES was 62. The MAP was 39,200 psi, SD 800 and the ES 1,600. There was a bit of hard bolt lift on all of the shots. There were no signs of pressure.
40 gr AA4350; velocity was 2340 fps, SD was 20 and the ES 52. The MAP was 41,600 psi, SD 10,00 and the ES 2,300. There was absolutely no bolt lift problem with any of the shots(?). There were no pressure signs.
I am at a loss to explain the bolt lift problems at some points yet at a higher pressure there are no bolt lift problems. There was no indication of excessive pressure at any times. The time pressure traces, the time under the pressure curve and the duration of the pressure curve showed no indication of any pressure spikes. The puff of filler between the muzzle and start screen was consistent and always present. I’m sure there is a reason but I can’t think of it yet.
There you have the Good and the Bad. The ugly is that accuracy for all the loads except the first 4895 load loads ran 4-6” until the last group with 40 gr of AA 4350 where only 3 shots stayed on the rather large target. I did not test the last 3 test strings because of the total loss of anything remotely that could be described as accuracy from a rifle barrel. Perhaps a shotgun barrel pattern would fit the description but not accuracy from a rifle.
I shall revisit the 4895 loads with a harder bullet and different lube. I will also try 3100, H4831SC and RL22. With those slower powders I will start at 31 gr and work up to 40 gr. That is the plan and the test continues.
Larry Gibson
Last edited by Larry Gibson; 01-09-2010 at 09:44 PM.
watching intently, thanks again.
Posting Permissions
| BP | Bronze Point | IMR | Improved Military Rifle | PTD | Pointed |
| BR | Bench Rest | M | Magnum | RN | Round Nose |
| BT | Boat Tail | PL | Power-Lokt | SP | Soft Point |
| C | Compressed Charge | PR | Primer | SPCL | Soft Point "Core-Lokt" |
| HP | Hollow Point | PSPCL | Pointed Soft Point "Core Lokt" | C.O.L. | Cartridge Overall Length |
| PSP | Pointed Soft Point | Spz | Spitzer Point | SBT | Spitzer Boat Tail |
| LRN | Lead Round Nose | LWC | Lead Wad Cutter | LSWC | Lead Semi Wad Cutter |
| GC | Gas Check |
