Hammer 22 Creedmoor Testing

Ok, it's been a long while since I've had to work this hard at something. I'm either going to have to throw in the towel, or I'm going to have to start trying some drastic deviations from the norm. I have a few more wild ideas I'm going to try next session... as I'm not quite ready to give up yet.

9c3m9RTh.jpg


Here's the last 112rnds of trying to get load work done on the 70gr HH's.
gUgANeTh.jpg


The bottom row on the top target is basically as consistent as I've been able to get with them so far. About the time I think I've locked into something good, it turns out to not be repeatable. POI stays fairly constant, but all attempts to get smaller performance have been thwarted. It remains very easy to get 1/2 to 5/8 MOA... but seemingly impossible to get better than that. That pair of targets represents 2 separate powders, over 5 grains of charge weight, and 125 thousandths of seating depth variation on both powders. Varget didn't work. H1000 didn't work. H4350 didn't work. RL26 didn't work. VV540 didn't work. VV560 didn't work. RL22 didn't work. Crimping didn't matter. They don't care about velocity or jump. Both the 52HH's and 70HH's behaved the same way.

There's so many unknowns. Do Hammers just hate my chamber? Do they hate Benchmark barrels? Do they require a special twist or land/groove configuration? Is there something inherent in the bullets designs that are causing this?

Keep in mind, Hammer isn't going around claiming sub 1/2 MOA. (at least not that I've seen)

Today, as a control... I went back to my trusty 80gr bergers and did a typical load dev session with them. The bottom part of the target is zeroing, and a quick confirmation of my two pet charge weights of H1000. Then a quick glance at seating depth options on the top row, I selected where I thought I should be... and fired two confirmation groups. Suffice it to say, this is just what I've come to expect from my 22 creeds. Sub-1/4 MOA is the norm with rifles configured my way with my reamers.

Y6FSaIOh.jpg


Frankly, I think I could have tightened it up even more with H4350.

I've got some powders which are completely outside the norm for the 22 creed. I'm going to move into them next and see what happens. I have exactly 517 rounds on this barrel now... and I can't help feeling that I've accomplished nothing. I know that isn't true, as I've been able to gather some great experience, but I stopped being excited about 1/2 MOA nearly 15 years ago. I have plenty of positive things to say about this experience and Hammer bullets, with the only real negative thus far being my seeming inability to make them shoot to my standard. I'm going to keep my spirits up, in hope that my unorthodox plan for the next session produces fruit.

There's something I'm missing here. All will benefit if I can figure out what it is. Frankly, this has all been kind of fun. It's been a long time since something has fought me like this.

-----------
Follow on Instagram
Subscribe on YouTube
Amazon Affiliate

Ok, it's been a long while since I've had to work this hard at something. I'm either going to have to throw in the towel, or I'm going to have to start trying some drastic deviations from the norm. I have a few more wild ideas I'm going to try next session... as I'm not quite ready to give up yet.

9c3m9RTh.jpg


Here's the last 112rnds of trying to get load work done on the 70gr HH's.
gUgANeTh.jpg


The bottom row on the top target is basically as consistent as I've been able to get with them so far. About the time I think I've locked into something good, it turns out to not be repeatable. POI stays fairly constant, but all attempts to get smaller performance have been thwarted. It remains very easy to get 1/2 to 5/8 MOA... but seemingly impossible to get better than that. That pair of targets represents 2 separate powders, over 5 grains of charge weight, and 125 thousandths of seating depth variation on both powders. Varget didn't work. H1000 didn't work. H4350 didn't work. RL26 didn't work. VV540 didn't work. VV560 didn't work. RL22 didn't work. Crimping didn't matter. They don't care about velocity or jump. Both the 52HH's and 70HH's behaved the same way.

There's so many unknowns. Do Hammers just hate my chamber? Do they hate Benchmark barrels? Do they require a special twist or land/groove configuration? Is there something inherent in the bullets designs that are causing this?

Keep in mind, Hammer isn't going around claiming sub 1/2 MOA. (at least not that I've seen)

Today, as a control... I went back to my trusty 80gr bergers and did a typical load dev session with them. The bottom part of the target is zeroing, and a quick confirmation of my two pet charge weights of H1000. Then a quick glance at seating depth options on the top row, I selected where I thought I should be... and fired two confirmation groups. Suffice it to say, this is just what I've come to expect from my 22 creeds. Sub-1/4 MOA is the norm with rifles configured my way with my reamers.

Y6FSaIOh.jpg


Frankly, I think I could have tightened it up even more with H4350.

I've got some powders which are completely outside the norm for the 22 creed. I'm going to move into them next and see what happens. I have exactly 517 rounds on this barrel now... and I can't help feeling that I've accomplished nothing. I know that isn't true, as I've been able to gather some great experience, but I stopped being excited about 1/2 MOA nearly 15 years ago. I have plenty of positive things to say about this experience and Hammer bullets, with the only real negative thus far being my seeming inability to make them shoot to my standard. I'm going to keep my spirits up, in hope that my unorthodox plan for the next session produces fruit.

There's something I'm missing here. All will benefit if I can figure out what it is. Frankly, this has all been kind of fun. It's been a long time since something has fought me like this.

-----------
Follow on Instagram
Subscribe on YouTube
Amazon Affiliate

I've only tried 35 grain out of 22-250 and 63 out of my 22 creed and get the same attitude out of them. 22-250 is a 12 tw and creeds are 8 tw. I only tried a couple different powders and seating depths with and without crimps. I couldn't get 135 .284 under 3/4". I'm goin to work my way up to 47-48 grains of 4350 with 63 grain pills to see how fast they'll scoot.
 
Hav
Ok, it's been a long while since I've had to work this hard at something. I'm either going to have to throw in the towel, or I'm going to have to start trying some drastic deviations from the norm. I have a few more wild ideas I'm going to try next session... as I'm not quite ready to give up yet.

9c3m9RTh.jpg


Here's the last 112rnds of trying to get load work done on the 70gr HH's.
gUgANeTh.jpg


The bottom row on the top target is basically as consistent as I've been able to get with them so far. About the time I think I've locked into something good, it turns out to not be repeatable. POI stays fairly constant, but all attempts to get smaller performance have been thwarted. It remains very easy to get 1/2 to 5/8 MOA... but seemingly impossible to get better than that. That pair of targets represents 2 separate powders, over 5 grains of charge weight, and 125 thousandths of seating depth variation on both powders. Varget didn't work. H1000 didn't work. H4350 didn't work. RL26 didn't work. VV540 didn't work. VV560 didn't work. RL22 didn't work. Crimping didn't matter. They don't care about velocity or jump. Both the 52HH's and 70HH's behaved the same way.

There's so many unknowns. Do Hammers just hate my chamber? Do they hate Benchmark barrels? Do they require a special twist or land/groove configuration? Is there something inherent in the bullets designs that are causing this?

Keep in mind, Hammer isn't going around claiming sub 1/2 MOA. (at least not that I've seen)

Today, as a control... I went back to my trusty 80gr bergers and did a typical load dev session with them. The bottom part of the target is zeroing, and a quick confirmation of my two pet charge weights of H1000. Then a quick glance at seating depth options on the top row, I selected where I thought I should be... and fired two confirmation groups. Suffice it to say, this is just what I've come to expect from my 22 creeds. Sub-1/4 MOA is the norm with rifles configured my way with my reamers.

Frankly, I think I could have tightened it up even more with H4350.

I've got some powders which are completely outside the norm for the 22 creed. I'm going to move into them next and see what happens. I have exactly 517 rounds on this barrel now... and I can't help feeling that I've accomplished nothing. I know that isn't true, as I've been able to gather some great experience, but I stopped being excited about 1/2 MOA nearly 15 years ago. I have plenty of positive things to say about this experience and Hammer bullets, with the only real negative thus far being my seeming inability to make them shoot to my standard. I'm going to keep my spirits up, in hope that my unorthodox plan for the next session produces fruit.

There's something I'm missing here. All will benefit if I can figure out what it is. Frankly, this has all been kind of fun. It's been a long time since something has fought me like this.

-----------
Follow on Instagram
Subscribe on YouTube
Amazon Affiliate

Have you tried groups further out - say 300 yds? We haven't spent enough time to establish patterns but have noticed in two of our rifles with fast running monos that they tightened up at 300 vs 100 yds. Not sure if the long less-dense projo takes longer to stabilize..?
 
Hav

Have you tried groups further out - say 300 yds? We haven't spent enough time to establish patterns but have noticed in two of our rifles with fast running monos that they tightened up at 300 vs 100 yds. Not sure if the long less-dense projo takes longer to stabilize..?
Yes, I've run them at 300, 500, and 600. No appreciable moa difference.
 
Just shot another group to confirm previous. Wind shifted from left -> right, to right -> left which pulled the group up a touch... I saw it but just held center for the sake of it.

RJTU3Iuh.jpg


I've spent a good portion of the morning with the 70gr HH's... and none of my ideas panned out. Still can't get them running small. Maybe something to try will hit me over the next couple days.

-----------
Follow on Instagram
Subscribe on YouTube
Amazon Affiliate

 
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
So I went out with my lovely wife and shot 220 pdogs today. Didn't fire this rifle once. lol We were having too much fun walking around with the .17's.

I did have some time to reflect on things though. This thread has been great. It's important that people see that not everything works for me. You guys tend to only see the victories... but there are many instances where things just do not work out the way I planned. My plan was to get Hammers shooting 1/4 moa or better, and then shoot out the barrel with them to see when they opened up to 1/2+... which is where I take barrels off typically. Turns out I can't get this barrel to get along with either of the hammers tried. This is not a reflection of Hammer bullets, and that's important for the less experienced folks to understand. This is one barrel, and what I was attempting is against all advice I would give any handloader. You don't always get to decide your bullet. It's nice when it works out, and with modern rifles and components... it can work out a lot.

It didn't always. Point in fact, it usually didn't. A guy had to work hard to find something the rifle liked. So the 52HH's and 70HH's don't like this barrel. That's all the conclusions that can be drawn at this point regarding accuracy and precision.

I have a small bit of pro's and con's I can share up to this point.

Pro's -
  1. Hammer as a company has been great to deal with. Super friendly guys there, and they obviously care a lot about their product. I so badly wanted this to work out, simply for the fact that they have been so nice to talk to.
  2. Hammer bullets do not foul the bore like traditional jacketed bullets. I was inspecting the bore constantly during the 500+rnds of testing... and these things left the bore more fouling free than any other bullet I've ever tested. This is a big deal folks, especially for factory rifle shooters out there. When I say they don't foul... I mean several hundred Hammers results in the same fouling I'd see from 30 traditional bullets. It's actually crazy.
  3. Speed. Greasy fast lightning speed abounds! Man alive these things can be pushed fast. Faster than any traditional bullet for certain. In this 22 creed, an extra 100fps was easy to grab. More if I really leaned into it.
  4. Consistency. The bullets were pretty consistent. Measured, weighed, seated... they just seemed to be consistent across the board. Solids tend to have that advantage over traditional bullets.
  5. Forgiveness. While I wasn't able to get them performing to my accuracy/precision standard... they were a pretty forgiving couple bullets as long as I wasn't trying for sub-1/2 MOA. I truly believe a blind monkey with one arm could load these things to 1/2 to 5/8'ish MOA.

Con's -
  1. They just wouldn't shoot small for me.
  2. Oil. The oil in the tips and oil on the exterior of the bullet created problems during seating, which undoubtedly showed up during flight. This will soon be remedied, as they are getting some equipment which will eliminate the problem. For now, it would pay for guys to centrifugally spin the oil out of the tips and use some alcohol and towel them off good before loading.

The plan from here: I have another 22 creed in an 8 twist, and another in a 7 twist. I'm going to try these 70HH's in both of them to see if there's anything worth looking at there. I also have a 22-250, two 22BRA's, a .223AI, and a few other .22cals I can try these things in. I'll update this thread if I discover anything worthwhile during that process. In the past, all solids I've tested have required a faster twist to behave right. These 70HH's are suppose to run fine in an 8 twist... but I have a sneaking suspicion they might perform better in a 7 or 6.5. The 52's were certainly spun good in this 8 twist, but there I was dealing with a massive freebore problem. Couldn't even attempt to hit the lands. I've got 80 thousandths, 100 thousandths, and 125 thousandths chambers at my disposal. So I intend to test the twist and freebore theories a bit.

I'm also going to try to get ahold of Hammer tomorrow to see if there's anything they think I'm missing.

As for this rifle, I think I can say it just won't play nice with the Hammers. Not as nice as I want in order to learn anything. If 3/4 MOA was my standard, it would probably take 3000 rounds or more to "burn out" this barrel with these bullets. I'm just not thinking there will be a lot to learn from something like that however. I need to have them running tight in order to see where they start shooting poorly, and that performance has to match up with all my existing data on traditional bullets performance which are sub 1/4 MOA.

Thanks for following along thus far guys. This has been a fun one.

-----------
Follow on Instagram
Subscribe on YouTube
Amazon Affiliate

 
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
Not sure if I'll use it on deer.

The rest of this response is not directed at anyone in particular. (don't read into anything @BEEMAN, not speaking negatively of you!) ;)

There are quite a lot of metrics I'll bee looking at, as this is my first experience with Hammer bullets. I have extensive experience with 22 creedmoor chambers, barrel configurations, components, and performance with traditional jacketed bullets. There are a lot of things being said about Hammers on this site, both positive and negative. It has become glaringly apparent that there is a lot being said on both sides which are false at worst, or over-simplified at best. Even if that were not true, there is a decided lack of first hand qualified accounts which have been meaningfully documented. So, this will be an objective collection of my observations, and I'll draw all the conclusions I can from those observations across the life of this barrel. No arguments will be engaged in or tolerated. I'll be documenting as much of the process as I can. The results will be what they are, and no amount of bickering will alter that fact. Disruptors will be reported and ignored. All are encouraged to comment and ask questions, but be respectful!

This barrel was started with Hammer 52's, and that's all the barrel will see across its life.

Initial observations:

Speed. These bullets move out... and they seem to shoot best when you are really stepping on it. Load development was interesting, because I'm accustomed to keeping in a low node. Initial results at lower pressures were not great. It also took a bit of work to find an optimal seating depth. Quite simply, they behave nothing like jacketed counterparts of equal weight. This was expected, given the unique design properties of the Hammers. The goal for the first session was to just start getting some rounds on them and see if I could start figuring out what the barrel likes. Definitely achieved that. Obviously I'll need quite a bit more rounds fired before I can do final load development, but having something that shows promise early is always nice.

Fouling. These Hammers don't seem to foul up like traditional jacketed bullets. Normally I would need to clean a new barrel within 20-30 rounds of firing because it will start to pressure up. Clean when new, fire 20-30, clean, fire 60 or so, clean... then I generally clean when I've decided I'd clean after that. This barrel has 64rnds on it presently and has not pressured up.

As is typical with lighter bullets in the .22 creed, H4350 does not seem to be optimal. Velocity topped out at 3975fps with H4350, as there was simply no more room in the case to get enough of it in there. Varget showed optimal case fill, velocity, accuracy, and precision in early testing with these Hammer 52's.

Jump tolerance and seating depth. It took a bit to discover where they liked to be seated, but once I found the window... tuning from 1/2MOA down to this little bug hole of significantly under 1/4 MOA, was a move of .005". The seating depth window of 1/2moa performance was about 50 thousandths wide. So, no conclusions can be drawn yet, but the initial observation is that they can shoot well across a wide range of seating depths, but to really get them to bug hole it will probably be a much smaller window. This chamber is running a .125 freebore. These bullets are hopping a LONG ways. Not quite sure how far yet, as I only had 2 driving bands engaged and it still wasn't touching the lands... so that will take further experimentation to discover. It's encouraging that they can shoot well with that large of a jump, as it tends to indicate a fairly forgiving bullet. This is also good from the perspective of speed, as longer jump will typically stay under pressure and leave room for performance.

Having zero experience with Hammers, I started from bare nothing... and I did not look on the internet for data because I did not want my experience tainted by preconceived notions. So work began drawing from only my own experience with the 22 Creed, and I think if I had worked with these bullets at all before I probably would have had an easier time locking into where they like to be earlier. My experience with jacketed bullets in the 22 Creed with my chambers is so extensive, I can usually get sub-1/4 MOA within 12-20rnds, regardless of component choice. These Hammers are a different critter all together, and I'm excited to be able to provide everyone with some quality data as this project progresses.


-----------
Follow on Instagram
Subscribe on YouTube
Amazon Affiliate

Very interesting write up.
 
Top