Help - Quickload Data - .243 Win + N140

[Sampo]

Would anyone with access to Quickload be kind enough to run some data for me please?

Rifle - Browning A-bolt
Barrel - 22"
Twist Rate - 1:10
Caliber - .243 Win
Bullet - Fox Non Lead 80gr
Brass - Federal (Once Fired and full resized)
Powder - Vihtavuori N-140
Primer - CCI Large Rifle

Reason for request - Running it via Gordon's reloading tool came back with 38.5gr as 'caution' and 39.5gr as 'Overpressure - do not load'. One one of the forums, 40.5gr of N140 appears to have the required energy above 1700 ft-lb but the pressure according to the tool appear to be in excess of 64.5k psi, which on a .243 may be dangerous. So trying to figure out if there was a mistake in the details I entered or if .243 is able to go over the 61k psi chamber pressure for copper bullets. As its new territory, trying to stay safe and also trying to work out the logic before progressing to the experimentation phase. If there was a flaw with the data I entered, please do correct me as its the first time I have used this application.

A starting load and the max load is what I am looking for, to help me get started. Thanks in advance.

 

[308tikka]

I would choose a different powder than N140.

 

[Lancaster]

Can you give me case capacity in CC of H20 and I will run it through, I've tried it using the capacity of my own brass and 40.5 looks over by about 0.5gn
39.6gn gives 1701ft/lb, but I need the case capacity to tweak it.

 

[Sampo]

Can you give me case capacity in CC of H20 and I will run it through, I've tried it using the capacity of my own brass and 40.5 looks over by about 0.5gn
39.6gn gives 1701ft/lb, but I need the case capacity to tweak it.

Thanks. I just measured it for the Winchester Brass I have and its 53.2gr of H2O = 3.44 cc I believe.

 

[Muir]

This is a prime example of Desperation Reloading: Trying to make available components overcome the laws of physics.

I'm sure its OK that Vhit's data was dismissed in favor of data gleaned from an Internet Forum. I mean. what does Vhit know about loading?? ~Muir

 

[Sampo]

This is a prime example of Desperation Reloading: Trying to make available components overcome the laws of physics.

I'm sure its OK that Vhit's data was dismissed in favor of data gleaned from an Internet Forum. I mean. what does Vhit know about loading?? ~Muir

Only trying to convince myself on a logic. I am sure, I can look for other powders to meet the current requirement but if there are instances of someone achieving this with the same powder, want tempted to figure out how it works. I have also written to Viht asking for loading data for the same using this powder.

 

[3.5mag]

I would have used N160 instead?

 

[Andrewslater]

At 64k your almost certainly going to be blowing the primers out of their pockets.

I use N150 for 80gr TTSX in .243 and found pressure signs at 40.5gr (59007psi according to GRT). 39.0 was perfect keyholing group at 100. According to GRT produces 1669 ft/lb all groups above this which met 1700ft/lb were grouping within an inch at 100 so may well be acceptable for you (i dont have the 1700ft/lb requirement as wont use this calibre in scotland) so picked the best group. I only ladder tested from 39gr to 40.5 in 0.3 increments.

I would ignore the Viht data for 80gr as applies to a lead projectile with a length of 0.8504 instead of the fox projectile length of 1.0787. The barnes projectile i have mentioned has a length of 1.0827 so is much closer to that you are using.

 

[Lancaster]

I would have used N160 instead?

I would have used Hunter, but if that's what the guy has in stock it's worth a try.
I had a look at my Lymans manual and for 80, 85 and 90gn bullets, albeit in Lead, they have some powders listed that have an even faster burn rate than N140.

 

[Andrewslater]

I would have used N160 instead?

Looks like it could work at the top end of its pressure, but GRT suggests could be verging on a compressed load to get above 1700ft/lb.

 

[3.5mag]

I suggested N160 as I use it for 75gr max & 85gr Sierra hpbt.....Hornady load data showed it more efficient than N140.
Staying at just under max load showed no problems

 

[Lancaster]

I suggested N160 as I use it for 75gr max & 85gr Sierra hpbt.....Hornady load data showed it more efficient than N140.
Staying at just under max load showed no problems

Out of interest what is your load?
QL suggested 46.1 to get deer legal with an 80gn bullet in the OP's 22" barrel, 108% fill and 93.5% burn.

 

[3.5mag]

45gr for the 75gr Vmax, PPU case, Fed 210 primer.
43.5 gr for the 85gr Sierra, Geco case, Fed 210 primer.
Both loads for my T3X Varmint.
Velocity/ ft/lbs unknown

 

[SussexSteve]

N160 is the better powder

 

[Sampo]

N160 is the better powder

Are you using 80gr bullets? What load are you on for N160?

 

[Lancaster]

N160 is the better powder

I'm struggling to see how, both of the loads above look to be nowhere near deer legal, and to be comfortably over at max charge the load is 110% of case capacity.

 

[Andrewslater]

Correction: I don't know why I said I wont use calibre in Scotland, what I should of said is I don't have the 1700ft/lb requirement as I don't intend to use this calibre and bullet combo to shoot deer.

What is worth noting is with N150 pressure signs appeared exactly where GRT suggested they would. For me I'm pretty new to my reloading journey, but regardless there is no way I would run the risk of pushing beyond the documented max pressures.

 

[3.5mag]

I'm struggling to see how, both of the loads above look to be nowhere near deer legal, and to be comfortably over at max charge the load is 110% of case capacity.

If you're referring to my loads then as soon as I get the chance I'll chrono them. Is Quickload always correct? (Genuine question).
Neither load was compressed in the cases used. As it is, they've dropped Roe out to 170yds cleanly & destroyed foxes.

 

[Andrewslater]

If you're referring to my loads then as soon as I get the chance I'll chrono them. Is Quickload always correct? (Genuine question).
Neither load was compressed in the cases used. As it is, they've dropped Roe out to 170yds cleanly & destroyed foxes.

My Guess is when applying this load to the significantly longer copper projectile the load would become a compressed load, but as you say using your shorter lead projectile doesn't compress.

 

[3.5mag]

Ah, of course.