Load Development Ruger Precision Rifle .243

[Shootin4fun]

Another significant es event occured when we turned necks and went to neck sizing only with bushings.......neck tension is significant. We uniform our brass in all manner with out exception.

We also learned that indeed, H powders do produce the best results from the hot/cold test, so we tend to lean towards developing H powders now. When you do test different powders, try and compare similar burn rates and be sure to test and compare at the same velocity.

Thanks for the added info buck!

The turning of necks another thing I've been considering adding to my regimen lately, but wasn't sure how much this helped in rifles that don't have a tight fit in the neck area. It seems like a lot of work along with measuring the runout and all. Just getting into the accurateshooter.com article on it now. I'm not planning on winning 1K matches with a benchrest rifle, just tuning loads for sporter rifles to the best possible accuracy.

I have started doing neck sizing only recently and find it's worth it if only to avoid having to lube and clean the whole case. What a time and mess saver. Before that I was not even bumping the shoulder in FL resizing.

BUT, did I make a mistake by buying a STANDARD RCBS neck sizing die, and not a die that uses bushings?? Will using a bushing neck sizer make a significant difference? It's easy to imagine that neck tension can make a measurable difference.

Soon we will get into annealing...it never ends.

 

[brentc]

It just goes to show how much can go into reloading in the chase for maximum precision at extended range. I haven't gone into the neck turning regimen for my RPR and I probably won't. My RPR has proven to me that it doesn't need match prepped brass to shoot .5 MOA or slightly better out to 500 yards. If I was serious about achieving groups in the .2's or even .3's out past 500 yards on a fairly consistent basis like these guys you can bet I'd be turning necks.

I use a standard FL RCBS die to size and bump the shoulder .002" and a Forster micrometer seater. I ended up settling on 105 HVLD seated .007" off the lands with Norma MRP, and a CCI 250 primer in Winchester brass.

 

[Shootin4fun]

Thanks for the reminder about distances Brent. We get carried away chasing perfection sometimes when it may not be warranted. I would love to be able to shoot LD in the wilderness, but rarely get a chance to go beyond 400. I'm sure my results would fall apart at 600+ with the 243 but with only FL sizing and a .002 bump, no turning, etc., I have shot many , 1" 3 shot groups at 300, some down to .5". 1" at 350 up a mountain on a good day. (It's a rugged but beautiful climb.) Good enough for hunting I suppose.

 

[buckfvr]

So I trim my .243 neck walls to 13k, add each side of the neck and you have 26k, add the bullets .244 and you have .270, now you use a .268 bushing to achieve 2k neck tension....... That is how the numbers work whether you turn necks to 14k on down to 11k. It just makes them all the same.....key word there, uniformity. Its easy and makes a difference. Thats to answer shootin4fun. Standard neck sizing dies are for unturned necks.

We have included neck turning in with all the other steps in uniforming our brass, we feel we'd may as well do it all why we're at it. Im using h4831sc with Lapua brass and Fed gold medal match primers.

Also, when we post 1/2 moa or less ( and some bigger ) groups, we speak 5 shot. All our group data is based on 5 shots. R

Brentc Im shooting same bullet @ .008.

 

[Shootin4fun]

Yes, consistency, uniformity is the key no doubt. All of this is of course time consuming. Another approach is used by Froggy. Read about his technique at Bugholes from Bipod within AccurateShooter.com from a bipod

No neck turning and he doesn't even use the expander ball! Seems almost like the opposite extreme, but we certainly can't argue with his results.

All of these approaches make sense. Need more time and it sure helps to shoot at a free range!

 

[jdmecomber]

I read that article. I tried some of his tips years ago. Lots of good people out there to learn your own style. Also one thing to keep in mind. Whenever I read something, I want to know what kind of gun they are shooting. I believe that we have to go the extra mile to get our factory guns/mostly factory guns to perform very well consistently. That extra mile has become a pretty quick process for us now.

Example that bughole guy shoots an AE 308 probably costs 6x more then my RPR. Chambers's probably tighter, tolerances better making them much easier to achieve accuaracy. Just some thoughts.

 

[Shootin4fun]

I believe that we have to go the extra mile to get our factory guns/mostly factory guns to perform very well consistently. That extra mile has become a pretty quick process for us now.

Example that bughole guy shoots an AE 308 probably costs 6x more then my RPR. Chambers's probably tighter, tolerances better making them much easier to achieve accuaracy. Just some thoughts.

Yes, part of the fun for me is to take a stock rifle and make it shoot cloverleaves. I wouldn't mind doing a match, but in terms of what I'm into these days, I'd want it to be a stock rifle match, sporter barrels only. The harmonics are harder to overcome with sporters and that's the whole reloading thing. But that's what I'm hiking around with for miles and miles in the rugged mountains of the Sierra Nevadas. None of that is to impune or denigrate the value or fun of shooting a custom gun, just another type of game in the arena.

Actually, my 243 is capable of .3 MOA groups with Federal Blue box 100gr SPs and their 80gr HPs, and my original goal was to reload to save $ and just match that. Then it became a thing of using a wider range of more exotic projectiles. Then there became the unleaded thing in Calif. On and on...really just an excuse to go shooting some more. gun)

 

[GonehikinginAz]

I've had great results, at least for me, in my 243 RPR with 46.5 grains of RL26 and 40.3 grains of IMR 4451 using 105 Bergers and 107 SMK's, plus 32.0 grains of H4895 and 58 grain vmax's, as well as 13.0 grains of Trail Boss with the VMax for a really light training load. A couple of 3 and 5 shot groups are even posted on the Ruger Challenge page under 3 and 5 shot 100 yard groups and JonK. This gun is now for sale to make room for other projects so if anyone is interested just PM me.

 

[GonehikinginAz]

I've had great results, at least for me, in my 243 RPR with 46.5 grains of RL26 and 40.3 grains of IMR 4451 using 105 Bergers and 107 SMK's, plus 32.0 grains of H4895 and 58 grain vmax's, as well as 13.0 grains of Trail Boss with the VMax for a really light training load. A couple of groups are even posted on the Ruger Challenge page under 3 and 5 shot 100 yard groups and JonK. This gun is now for sale to make room for other projects so if anyone is interested just PM me.

 

[Mangust1]

I don't believe that setting up accuracy testing at 100 yards is ligit. After going to 300 yard you would be on the right track. Wish there was less misleading information. Very expensive to re do it the right way.
Best.

 

[Shootin4fun]

I don't believe that setting up accuracy testing at 100 yards is ligit. After going to 300 yard you would be on the right track. Wish there was less misleading information. Very expensive to re do it the right way.
Best.

Why not legit? Short distance negates external factors for the most part except for changing moderate winds of course. It's just a starting point as far as I'm concerned. Once a sub moa load is identified at 100, the fun can begin at 200.

Just visited a range that has 100 yard increments out to 600. That kind of resolution really helps. 1K ranges are rare; seems like most guys have to do that on public land in far off places.

 

[GonehikinginAz]

I don't believe that setting up accuracy testing at 100 yards is ligit. After going to 300 yard you would be on the right track. Wish there was less misleading information. Very expensive to re do it the right way.
Best.

Well I obviously have a lot to learn! Especially since it sure looks like I have an accidental double post I don't know how to edit out here!

On the other hand, If I'm not mistaken Bryan Litz in a recent book of his speaks very highly of 100 yard testing, so that's sounds like a good place to start for us public range guys.

 

[buckfvr]

When you're testing rifle and load, 100 yards is paramount for no other reason than minimizing shooter influence. 300 yards and beyond is as much or more about the shooter.

 

[jdmecomber]

I was at a shoot last weekend spotting for a couple guys. Some of the guys were talking about 6.5 Creedmoor and 6mm Creedmoor, I wanted to find the answer for myself. There are a couple really good articles out there about the differences. Precision Rifle Blog has a great article on the subject.

So I wrote up a quick test, with these three bullets around there max velocities
All three head to head, same conditions and data out to 1000 yards

1 rating being the best, 3 being the worst

105 VLD 130 VLD 140 VLD

Cost 1 2 3

Energy 3 2 1

Barrel
Life 3 2 1

Recoil 1 2 3

Form
Factor 1 2 3

Transonic
1 2 3

Drop 1 2 3

Spin
Drift 1 2 3


Wind 2 3 1

Lowest Score wins

105 14 points, 130 19 points, 140 21 points

So the 105 vld wins score wise some things to think about

Cost was about 30-40 cents cheaper for the .243 per round

Energy was a 200lb more for the 140 vld, but doesn't getting you great long range killing power

Recoil 130/140 had about a pound more recoil

Barrel life for the 130 and 140 was a considerable advantage

Transonic zone wasn't much of a difference between all three bullets

105 drop was a clear winner

Spin Drift we are talking 3/4in difference between all three at 1000

Wind the 105 and the 140 were almost identical

All that being said,

If I was going to build/purchase another project gun for long range targets and hunting, I would probably build something in the 6.5. The barrel life was 800-900 rounds more. I would shoot the 140 Vld or similar