Case capacity issue.
- Thread starter Im65
- Start date
Yes x3!
If changing any component you should work up again, US brass generally has more capacity than European brass as it’s thinner, but doesn’t last as long as a result.
I’ve found a variance in the weight of cartridges in the same batch of 100 of 2 - 3 grains.
palmer_mike
Well-Known Member
Could be variation in bullet weight, case or powder charge. Most likely a combination of those?
Cases have to be manufactured with strict outside tolerances in order to fit the chamber.
Powder is weighed on a balance scale and then checked on electronic scales.
Bullets also have to be manufactured to fairly strict standards.
So outer dimensions have to be almost identical.
The only place any variance can occur is the internal dimensions of the case.
Also you might want to have a read of this.
Effects of Case Weight Variation on Accuracy
I'm starting to load for a .222 Rem. and am using Lapua cases. I weighed about 100 of the cases and found them to vary between about 92.0 and 94.0 grains. At this point, I'm wondering whether this much variation in 5 cases shot for group would cause variations in internal capacity enough to...
forum.accurateshooter.com
palmer_mike
Well-Known Member
ok guess you know best.
I’ve been guided by someone who has had articles published on target shooting in various magazines.
Who has won target shooting competitions and who has guided the American team on case weights for shooting in the Palma Match. Is also good friends with Geoff Kolbe previously of Border Barrels
I wouldn’t say I know best but I hope that I’ve learnt somethings from the Gent.
palmer_mike
Well-Known Member
I’m disinclined to enter into a ****ing competition but I do have some experience in loading ammunition (professionally) for some very high precision purposes.
I have never doubted your capabilities, only stated my experience.
Hunters moon
Well-Known Member
Not looked at the water thing before, simple to do please?
Foxyboy43
Well-Known Member
Hmmm. Not entirely apposite to the original post but bear with…
From the post it would appear that the bullet in question is being used for live quarry - presumably fox etc…
Viht’s data for the chambering, powder and bullet used -
For what it is worth - when it comes to compressed loads I have never been in this position because, call me old-fashioned, I have never seen the need to go to the max of any powder data (pause for collective SD howl….).
Way back when I started reloading I did, like us all, experiment with hotter loads and my data (written on parchment) shows that for example a full 1.5 gns of N133 yielded an additional 75fps to a 125gns .308 bullet which was already clipping along at just south of 2,900 fps. I noted no difference in terms of accuracy or obturation. My scribbles also tell me that the subsequent increase in energy was something like 100ft lbs for a bullet already generating well north of 2,200 ft lbs. This is from the Viht data and seems to pretty much bear out my own musings…
Meanwhile back to the .223 - as you would expect and is shown in the earlier table, the velocity increase obtained by heavier powder loads for the .223 is greater pro rata because of the significantly smaller charges used - i.e. 2 gns yields c.270 fps over the initial 3,176 fps.
Now the point of all this - given my “no obvious benefits” conclusion and not being a target shooter I reasoned way back then that anything walking this little corner of the Big Fella’s green earth hit in the right place with an appropriate bullet going at said velocity, will die with pretty much the same certainty as one hit in the same place travelling c.75fps faster. In all my years I don’t recall an occasion where a target beast has failed to drop because of lack of my bullet speed and thus energy - nor do I think the benefit of that additional powder (pro rata) would have made any difference in any of my .222, 6.5x55 or .308 chamberings. It would seem a reasonable assumption that this would also apply to the .223 or indeed any other hunting round.
This being so and not in any way intending to challenge or heaven fore-fend, criticise, it would be interesting to learn what benefits the op’s hotter compressed load delivers.
Of course if you feel that there are discernible benefits for you be it in terms of accuracy, energy and confidence or all three in using hotter loads then just carry on as you were - within safe data limits.
Class discuss…
From the post it would appear that the bullet in question is being used for live quarry - presumably fox etc…
Viht’s data for the chambering, powder and bullet used -
| N133 | 1,51 | 23.3 | 968 | 3176 | 1,64 | 25.3 | 1051 | 3448 |
Way back when I started reloading I did, like us all, experiment with hotter loads and my data (written on parchment) shows that for example a full 1.5 gns of N133 yielded an additional 75fps to a 125gns .308 bullet which was already clipping along at just south of 2,900 fps. I noted no difference in terms of accuracy or obturation. My scribbles also tell me that the subsequent increase in energy was something like 100ft lbs for a bullet already generating well north of 2,200 ft lbs. This is from the Viht data and seems to pretty much bear out my own musings…
| N133 | 2,67 | 41.2gns | 869 | 2851fps | 2,87 | 44.3gns | 932 | 3058fps |
Meanwhile back to the .223 - as you would expect and is shown in the earlier table, the velocity increase obtained by heavier powder loads for the .223 is greater pro rata because of the significantly smaller charges used - i.e. 2 gns yields c.270 fps over the initial 3,176 fps.
Now the point of all this - given my “no obvious benefits” conclusion and not being a target shooter I reasoned way back then that anything walking this little corner of the Big Fella’s green earth hit in the right place with an appropriate bullet going at said velocity, will die with pretty much the same certainty as one hit in the same place travelling c.75fps faster. In all my years I don’t recall an occasion where a target beast has failed to drop because of lack of my bullet speed and thus energy - nor do I think the benefit of that additional powder (pro rata) would have made any difference in any of my .222, 6.5x55 or .308 chamberings. It would seem a reasonable assumption that this would also apply to the .223 or indeed any other hunting round.
This being so and not in any way intending to challenge or heaven fore-fend, criticise, it would be interesting to learn what benefits the op’s hotter compressed load delivers.
Of course if you feel that there are discernible benefits for you be it in terms of accuracy, energy and confidence or all three in using hotter loads then just carry on as you were - within safe data limits.
Class discuss…
Smellydog
Well-Known Member
I never went, shall we say top end for power FB.
I went for accuracy and usually found loads at their best at the top end of the scale.
In saying that I shot my furthest fox when in my twenties using a 222 and a 52 gn bullet trundling along at 2850 FPS. 388 paces to pick it up.
In my last 308 I used a lot of Hornady vmax 110gn on a case literally brimmed with h4895.
That Remington 700 would with a 20" barrel return 3160fps and try it's best to shoot them down the same hole at 100.
The 1 or 2 gns of extra powder I used in top end loads I would rationalize as insignificant regards costs saving. Brass and primers were a lot cheaper then too!
I went for accuracy and usually found loads at their best at the top end of the scale.
In saying that I shot my furthest fox when in my twenties using a 222 and a 52 gn bullet trundling along at 2850 FPS. 388 paces to pick it up.
In my last 308 I used a lot of Hornady vmax 110gn on a case literally brimmed with h4895.
That Remington 700 would with a 20" barrel return 3160fps and try it's best to shoot them down the same hole at 100.
The 1 or 2 gns of extra powder I used in top end loads I would rationalize as insignificant regards costs saving. Brass and primers were a lot cheaper then too!
Foxyboy43
Well-Known Member
Absolutely Smelly - accuracy wins every time, within safe limits of course.
Interestingly (honest) in the many years I have had the blessed triple deuce (other chamberings are available but sure why would you bother) by using a moderate powder load rather than the book max I reckon every 18th bullet has been free! Transpose that to well in excess of 20,000 bullets and there’s a few tubs of N120 paid for…
Wot? Wot?
Smellydog
Well-Known Member
Aye absolutely.Absolutely Smelly - accuracy wins every time, within safe limits of course.
Interestingly (honest) in the many years I have had the blessed triple deuce (other chamberings are available but sure why would you bother) by using a moderate powder load rather than the book max I reckon every 18th bullet has been free! Transpose that to well in excess of 20,000 bullets and there’s a few tubs of N120 paid for…
Wot? Wot?
With 120 though you probably ( without checking) in 222 might get to hot if the case was really really filled ??
With 133 or slower even one might not get the goods until a case full etc.
My problem is powder choice, or rather the lack of it. So I tend to have to work with what I can get.
Foxyboy43
Well-Known Member
Powder choice is even worse over here Smelly as we are such a small market and there is I believe only one approved carrier.
Increasingly Viht is Unicorn poop but Lovex is obtainable - long may it continue…
Similar threads
