6.5 Creedmoor 130 grain ELD-M and 130 grain TGK load development

[Joe Texas]

Perhaps i missed this but nevertheless- Measuring coal is not really a great way except to stay inside the mag, to ensure your seating depth are consistent I suggest you use a base to ogive measurement.

As you can tell from the fact I said exactly that, I agree with you. Still, I’ve had success doing the best I could using OAL and with projectiles that are (presumably) consistently manufactured.

I switched to the Redding seating die and reduced my OAL variation to .001. I then reseated all the bullets in the seating depth test.

I will one day level up to using a CBTO tool. Today however is just not that day. Tomorrow isn’t looking too likely either. I also don’t anneal brass, turn necks, or use a bushing die to get more uniform neck tension. There are several ways I know about to improve my loading process. I imagine there are still many others that I am unaware of. For now though, I’m gonna (probably naively) trust Hornady’s consistency and say that the RCBS die was the cause of the initial large (.005) variation in COAL.

 

[JFrank]

Sorry..I don't think your naive at all.

I read your post saying you already had the tool to measure base to ogive, but ( assumption on my part) switch to measuring base to bullet tip when seating then question the accuracy of the seating die.
My apologies if I misunderstood.

 

[Joe Texas]

View attachment 1003894
Sorry..I don't think your naive at all.

I read your post saying you already had the tool to measure base to ogive, but ( assumption on my part) switch to measuring base to bullet tip when seating then question the accuracy of the seating die.
My apologies if I misunderstood.

No apology necessary! I truly appreciate the good advice.

I have the Hornady OAL tool with the modified case that uses a specific bullet to find distance to lands (or jam depending on how hard you shove it). It isn’t super precise.

I really do need to learn to measure base to ogive. I know that would be more consistent. I was agreeing with you. I know enough to know there’s a lot I don’t know. I know my current method is especially prone to error with plastic-tipped bullets. It is always at the mercy of the bullet manufacturer’s quality and consistency. I was thrilled to do as well as I did with the Redding seating die.

I take several measurements with 5-10 different bullets with the Hornady OAL tool and take an average of the results. The variation in those measurements alone tells me that I have about a .005 margin of error. If the seating die causes an additional variation of .005 it could cause a total variation of .010. It makes me afraid to get any closer than that to the lands. I worry that sometimes I might think I’m I just a little off the lands when I am actually jammed a little.

Again, no worries. my tone was more one of admitting my unwillingness to make the changes necessary to improve rather than defending my current process.

 

[JFrank]

I'm heading out the door on my way to a LR event this morning but here's an example of base to ogive, using the same tools you have i find my lands at 1.798' this particular rifle likes a .025 jam giving me 1.823 bto. My seater is set to produce rounds at this measurement. I also sort bullets from the bullet base to ogive and write the number on the box, loading only those within .001 on each side of this number yields consistentcy on paper.

 

[Joe Texas]

View attachment 1004069I'm heading out the door on my way to a LR event this morning but here's an example of base to ogive, using the same tools you have i find my lands at 1.798' this particular rifle likes a .025 jam giving me 1.823 bto. My seater is set to produce rounds at this measurement. I also sort bullets from the bullet base to ogive and write the number on the box, loading only those within .001 on each side of this number yields consistentcy on paper.

Wait, what!? I didn’t bleepin’ realize that was possible!

I do have that headspace tool you pictured. Still, that’s not the tool I am using. Mine is the Overall Length Gauge in my attached pic. I’ve only used your pictured headspace tool to measure shoulder push back after full-length resizing. I struggle to get consistent measurements though. It seems to hit the calipers different every time.

I have sorted 500 ct. packs of .223 69 grain SMKs by weight before. I’m working w/100 ct. boxes of the ELD-M so I guess I didn’t think about sorting them at this point. I probably will when I can find larger packs. Maybe by then I’ll have obtained a better CBTO measuring option or learned to use what I have.

 

[JFrank]

View attachment 1004174
Wait, what!? I didn’t bleepin’ realize that was possible! I do have that headspace tool you pictured. Still, that’s not the tool I am using. Mine is the Overall Length Gauge in my attached pic. I’ve only used your pictured headspace tool to measure shoulder push back after full-length resizing. I struggle to get consistent measurements though. It seems to hit the calipers different every time.

For Headspace measuring my br cartridges I use a .300 bushing in the comparator rather than an angled gizzy. Pictured is base to .300 datum

 

[Joe Texas]

For Headspace measuring my br cartridges I use a .300 bushing in the comparator rather than an angled gizzy. Pictured is base to .300 datum

Makes sense. So, apparently I own the Headspace Comparator kit with the bushing set and the OAL gauge with the threaded cartridges.

 

[JFrank]

I don't weigh bullets, the slight difference hasn't shown on paper at 1000 yards but for some reason an oddball length bullet will.

 

[Joe Texas]

Update:
130 grain ELD-M
Hornady FLRS brass trimmed to 1.91
Fed 210M primers
COAL 2.837

38.3 grains Varget
3 shots
2772 fps
SD 1
Group size: .625”

38.5 grains Varget
3 shots
2837 fps
SD 30
Group size: .9375
One primer slightly flattened

38.7 grains Varget
3 shots
2817 fps
SD 38
Group size: .8125
Slightly flattened primers

 

[Walkalong]

A Sinclair holder with inserts for .22 caliber, 6MM caliber, & .30 caliber, plus a
30 degree insert for checking shoulder position on cases with 30 degree shoulders.

 

[Joe Texas]

A Sinclair holder with inserts for .22 caliber, 6MM caliber, & .30 caliber, plus a
30 degree insert for checking shoulder position on cases with 30 degree shoulders.
View attachment 1004312

Thank you!

 

[Joe Texas]

Seating depth test:
130 grain ELD-M
37.0 grains Varget
Hornady brass trimmed to 1.91”
Fed 210M primers
2.855 (.005 off) - 2.810 (.050 off) in .005 increments

 

[Joe Texas]

I split the difference between the most promising seating depths and seated everything I had prepped to 2.8325. The Redding seating die kept the COAL within .001-.002.

*38.3 grains of Varget may get a revisit at some point.

Tomorrow I will start with the more appropriate 6.5 powders. N160 is first up.

Next weekend, I hope to shoot the H4350 and N555 tests I have loaded.

It’s taking over 3 hours to shoot a 50 round charge ladder because it’s 95 degrees and I’m taking longer between shots to protect the barrel. I miss winter.

 

[JFrank]

The barrels I've dealt with take a hundred rounds or so to break in and actually speed up, I don't get to serious with load development until then as I would be chasing my tune a bit. At some point you may wish you had those rounds back.

 

[Joe Texas]

I've shot the Sierra 130gr TMK with Varget. My best load was 38.4gr at 2.800" OAL, and Rem 7.5 primers. This yielded 2750 fps (24" barrel) and sub MOA accuracy.

Turns out that 38.3 shows promise for me. (See post in this thread).

 

[Joe Texas]

The barrels I've dealt with take a hundred rounds or so to break in and actually speed up, I don't get to serious with load development until then as I would be chasing my tune a bit. At some point you may wish you had those rounds back.

Thanks again for letting me benefit from your experience!
• I started with Varget and saved N555, N160, and H4350 tests for that very reason. Shilen’s website actually recommends not “wasting break-in or fire-forming rounds but using them for load development.” Made sense to me.
• I did start by cleaning after every round, then after each 5 round group as a break-in. Doing that has virtually eliminated copper fouling.
• I now have 106 rounds through it with 15 cleanings.
• After I shoot the other 3 powders’ tests I’ll have about 271 rounds through the barrel. I plan on loading 10 of each winner to test on paper at 200 yards.
• I’ll load 25 of the 200 yard winner and take an average of five 5-round groups at 200. That’ll be about what I’ll expect from “my 130 ELDM load”. I’ll have about 341 rounds through it at that point.
• Next I’ll focus on the winning 130 ELD powder with 130 grain TGKs. That’ll take another 50 rounds or so.
• Then I’ll be asking you to help me through the learning curve as I try to shoot steel from 300 and beyond.

Thanks again for helping me learn!

 

[JFrank]

Hand lapped barrels of smallerish ( is that a word?) calibers wont show a ton of copper fouling but will carbon up a lot and even get carbon rings at the leade around 500 rounds that can kill accuracy until you get in there and mechanically remove it by scrubbing a lot so be sure to use a good carbon remover a good brush ( i like bronze) .
Shoot Small
J

 

[Joe Texas]

Update: VV N160 test shot today

Savage 12 action
Boyd’s thumbhole varmit stock
Shilen Select Match 26” stainless barrel

6.5 Creedmoor
130 grain Hornady ELD-M
Hornady brass trimmed to 1.91”
Federal 210M LR primers
VV N160 powder
2.8325 COAL (.275 off lands)

5 rounds each charge @ 100 yards
Round-robin charges 1-5, Round-robin charges 6-10
Cleaned in-between 1st and second round-robin (25 rounds + fouling shot)
Bipod/rear bag

42.3 grains
Velocity - 2710
Standard Deviation - 9
5 round group size - 1”

42.5 grains, 2718 fps, SD 10, 5 @ 1.06”

42.7 grains, 2723 fps, SD 12, 5 @ .875”

42.9 grains, 2736 fps, SD 8, 5 @ 1.06”

43.1 grains, 2748 fps, SD 8, 5 @ .4375”

43.3 grains, 2771 fps, SD 5, 5 @ .5625”

43.5 grains, 2783 fps, SD 7, 5 @ .5”

43.7 grains, 2784 fps, SD 8, 5 @ 1.25

43.9 grains, 2808 fps, SD 12, 5 @ .9375”

44.1 grains, 2806 fps, SD 7, 5 @ 1”

I’m thinking 43.4 might be acceptable.

Next weekend I hope to shoot the H4350 and VV N555 tests.

 

[Joe Texas]

PREVIEW:

I couldn’t wait.
I went ahead and loaded 25 rounds with Sierra’s 130 grain Tipped Game Kings over VV N160 based on the 130 ELD-M charge test results.

I loaded 5 each @ 43.0 - 43.8 in .2 grain increments since 43.4 seemed to be the ELD winner.

I chose the same jump as the winner of the ELD seating depth test - .0275 off the lands. This gives them an average OAL of 2.8485 in my chamber since the Hornady OAL gauge averaged a measurement of 2.876 to the lands with the 130 TGK.

I’m going to try to sneak out to the range one day this week to shoot ‘em. My hope is that they like a similar charge and jump since they are the same weight and similar shape.

If it works out, it’ll save a lot of components not having to do full charge weight and jump workup for the TGK with each powder tested.

 

[Walkalong]

Nice work. To save bullets and barrel life I do three shots each in initial work up. Sometimes one each to figure initial velocities.

 

[JFrank]

Yes nice work... @Joe Texas

Lately I'm liking two shots of each charge weight as a course test than narrow down to just a .4 grain total window to work in with 3 rounds each, also keeping in mind that as weather changes so goes your tune that will require maintenance to stay sharp.
I like what your doing to develop a a good load but I would add if I may be so bold that when you analyze the results in a horizontal format what we are looking for is the location of the group center in relationship to the groups in each side of the charge weight rather than group size which can be fine tuned, this helps select a node that is forgiving and will be stable.

 

[JFrank]

This is how I see your test. I could wrong of course...

 

[Joe Texas]

View attachment 1004843This is how I see your test. I could wrong of course...

Thanks Jim!

You’ll notice that you chose in between 43.3 and 43.5 grains.

You may also notice down at the bottom of my report I stated that 43.4 grains would be acceptable.

If I was going strictly by group size I would have chosen the 43.1 charge with its smallest group size.

 

[JFrank]

D

 

[Joe Texas]

View attachment 1004843This is how I see your test. I could wrong of course...

I almost forgot…….Check out the arrow I put on my target yesterday.