New gun - working up a load question(s)

[flyingfrog509]

OK, I finally got my new gun put together. Savage 110, McGowen barrel chambered in 6.5-06, Rifle Basix trigger, Choat Tactical stock with drop mags, EGW rail & rings, SWFA SS scope (wish I had a Nightforce but for the money I'm happy). Any how I had loaded up 5 rounds each to do OCW load development of 7 different charge weights and 10 rounds each of a few that seemed to be common pet rounds for others on reloaders bench and the such.

Short story is I didn't have time to run my OCW load development. I did have time to sight in my scope, and then shoot two five round groups. The second group that I shot ended up landing me a .544 group outside to outside. (a .280 group center to center) at 100 yards. I was shocked that I could get so lucky to have two groups in initial development shoot so good.

QUESTION: So do I just call it a day, or see if one of the other loads does better? What are the chances of getting something that much better to offset the cost and time to continue load development?

QUESTION 2: If I've loaded with H4831, do I just stick with it or try to go with H4831sc? I've read that they are about the same. Can I assume the short cut is simply for better metering? I hand weigh all my bench rounds so again is it worth even trying something even slightly different?

I hope this doesn't sound to stupid, I just have always been loading for hunting rifles and typically if we find a load that shoots under .75moa at 100 we just stop and say good enough. Just looking for sanity check. :-)

Attached is a picture of the gun and the first group & a picture of the second group. Both 5 shot groups off bipod and bench.

 

[Twitch2120]

Load some more of whatever the charge weight was. If it is consistent then rock on. If not then that group was a fluke. If it's consistent then play with seating depth a bit. You would be suprised how much a group can open or tighten baseD on that

 

[snatch3838]

The riffle seems to be capable of more. Start at 300 then ask yourself the same questions. Up it and then ask again with all the reload data there is no doubt you selected a good load. With a built riffle I would have a light bullit load a heavy bullet load and a quick load ( lee dipper type premeasured for blasting away if it's semi auto or letting your kid shoot) no since in wasting all that time on loads build up a precision if a 20yd shoot will make your kid happy. Also if you shoot in the cold you get different result thAts why the hunters like varget so much is has the lowest variance when temp drops.

 

[BHJ]

Looks like a great start to me. I'd double check with a few more rounds and follow the advice above about tinkering with the seating depth After you confirm whether the load is consistent you may also try a couple of different primers just because they are inexpensive often overlooked as a variable and can make a big difference for better or worse.

 

[watchingtrace]

i look at like 2 different parts of the equation. a gun can shoot great short but not long and vice versa.

i work the speed/long first by using a ladder test and a http://www.magnetospeed.com/collections/frontpage/products/magnetospeed-sporter (i use the v3 but this works just as well with a few less features) go up by
.2 gr and look for speed clusters or if your shooting the ladder on paper impact clusters (this needs to be done at 400 yds min,think refridge box)

the above gets the gun flat as its capable long.

then work the oal to get it tight short at 100 like youve already done.


its possible you got lucky and hit the long node and correct oal at the same time,i usually dont get that lucky

if i change any component in the equation primers, powders,projectiles it gets its own full rework through the pressure curve. a different component changes everything

 

[kuduman]

He has a problem though-- barrel life. Same problem I have with 6.5x284. (At least I think the 6.5-06 has a short barrel life.)

Go through all those steps-- and you'll have 500 shots left before you have to start over with a new barrel!

Also, it's not true about the "shooting better at long range". Physically impossible; there is no mechanism that can explain that other than parallax in the scope. See Brian Litz' work on the subject for more.

Yikes, I said the above backwards. Edited.

 

[sewerman68]

I'd just frame that target and call it a day.

 

[watchingtrace]

He has a problem though-- barrel life. Same problem I have with 6.5x284. (At least I think the 6.5-06 has a short barrel life.)

Go through all those steps-- and you'll have 500 shots left before you have to start over with a new barrel!

Also, it's not true about the "shooting better up close". Physically impossible; there is no mechanism that can explain that other than parallax in the scope. See Brian Litz' work on the subject for more.

lol

speed test takes 10 rds

oal work 15-20

explain what exactly it is you mean is not true. so i can help you understand

ive talked with litz personally about kestrel ballistic programs

i have seen multiple times, guns that shoot like poo short shoot awesome long. it is fact, not something ive read or heard. i was there and actually pulled the trigger on some of those many occasions

 

[kuduman]

lol

speed test takes 10 rds

oal work 15-20

explain what exactly it is you mean is not true. so i can help you understand

ive talked with litz personally about kestrel ballistic programs

i have seen multiple times, guns that shoot like poo short shoot awesome long. it is fact, not something ive read or heard. i was there and actually pulled the trigger on some of those many occasions

You obviously know something I do not-- how do you get optimum OAL in 15-20 shots? I would really like to know that. I shoot five-shot groups at multiple OALs, but would sure like to have a better way. Would be a lot cheaper!

The other-- the myth that some guns shoot tighter (angular) groups at long range vs. short. It's impossible. Bullets have no memory or special flippers with which to drift back toward their ideal flight line. What folks are seeing is some other effect, optical or psychological. But maybe you are referring to some other long-range characteristic, not angular group size.

 

[flyingfrog509]

I did do my homework and tried my best to get close right from the get go. Many of the 6.5 long bullets recommend touching the lands or close to it so I sat about .015 off (measuring each round at the ogive to be safe as possible) So it isn't just sh_t luck...but lucky compared to my previous tries with other guns. So I might play with the depth a little more BUT DANG these guys are already 3.4x OAL as in longer than a factory 140 7mm mag round. Lucky for me the mags were for 300 win mag modified to fit the 6.5-06 round.

I did go with the 1:8 twist barrel so I could shoot the slower 140(s) to keep from burning up the barrel. Powder is slow & I let it cool between rounds...so hopefully I'll get at least 1K+ rounds through it before it is time for a new barrel.

NO, the kids aren't shooting this one just for fun. They have their own guns for that and I shared by buying them guns before I built mine. :-)

I have read about some bullets not being good at distance but I believe that has more to do with bullet stabilization...no real experience with that yet. Matter of fact it was able to put 3 on steel at 500 yards in just about 3 inches...I'm guessing that was luck because I shot 2 and my son shot 1.

Any how I'm leaning towards shooting my "ladder" rounds just to see what happens after all who wants to pull bullets and I might see a sweet spot for a range of powder that will work instead of just exactly 49.5. After that play with seating a little more and report back.

I'm really tempted to load up another 50 of the 49.5(s) that shot so good already and take it to the 1000 yard range down by my parents house just to make sure it shoots that far. I'll just tell my wife the guys on ODT said I should. Yep I'm throwing you all under the bus. You know you blame other members when explaining things to your wives too. :-)

Thanks for the feedback guys.