My New Defensive Edge LRKM

[Outlaw6.0]

Broz,

I found the same data when researching a uber slow burning powder to use in my 6.5WSM (trying to extend throat life). N570 is kicking rear end for me as I seem to reach max pressures right around 100% case capacity (or just over).

Frank Green of Bartlein fame hates double based powder & warns that it will erode the throat faster than normal. I have no idea if this is true or what powder he was talking about but I thought the conflicting report was worth sharing.


t

 

[Rocky Mountain]

Here is what Vit. claims about the 500 series powders:

Quote from the Vit. web site:

"N500 series

Adding nitroglycerol to the traditional single base powder makes possible in addition to geometry and coating a third controlled variable of ballistic properties: energy content. Vihtavuori calls powders that have nitroglycerol added (maximum 25%) high energy NC-powders, which form N500 series.

Adding nitroglycerol to the high energy N500 series is done by impregnation. After that, the grains are coated with a new type of chemical which results in very progressive burning characteristics.

The composition of a typical high energy powder is as follows:

* nitrocellulose * nitroglycerol

* coating agent * stabilizer

* flame reducing agent * wear reducing agent

Geometrically the powders in the N500 series are equal to the N100 series. Although these new powders have a higher energy content, they do not cause greater wear to the gun. This is because the surface of the powder has been treated with an agent designed to reduce barrel wear. N500 series powders work well at different temperatures, even better than the traditional N100 and N300 series. Temperature sensitivity naturally depends very much on the weapon and on the cartridge. The manufacturing technique employed permits a very high bulk density, which in turn makes it possible to use a bigger charge in a certain limited loading volume."

I am pleased you are getting great results with N570 but I'm sorry to say that the N500 powders do wear out barrels faster than single base powders I have seen this for myself in a few barrels now.

 

[JeffVN]

For me, barrell life is less important than performance of the rifle. I view barrels as consumables, just like bullets and brass. I fully expect to replace the barrels, but I would rather not do so every year. I don't shoot anything that I consider to be a real barrel burner (currently 6x47 Lapua, 30-06 Ackley, 7 WSM, 7 Dakota, 338 LM Improved), but I do like performance.

Jeffvn

 

[Broz]

Jeffvn, I agree, this rifle is about performance to me. I wanted to go farther. I was hoping to get to 3K with decent repeatability and a degree of accuracy. My PLRF10 will range to 2990 yards. I now feel I have a rifle to get me there. I think I will go ahead and talk to Shawn about getting a second barrel on order and start it now. Then the barrel swap will be a shorter process. I have owned barrel burners before and found that they are not best used as the every day rifle. But with my 6br and 300 win to shoot most often I hope to get along fine with the new 338. I am sure at some point whether it is a year or 3 years I will need a replacement barrel.

Jeff

 

[Kiwi Greg]

Jeffvn, I agree, this rifle is about performance to me. I wanted to go farther. I was hoping to get to 3K with decent repeatability and a degree of accuracy. My PLRF10 will range to 2990 yards. I now feel I have a rifle to get me there.

Jeff

Now I have a big 338 & 375 on the Cheytac improved DCM case I find my PLRF10 is holding me back.....

Currently working on a 375 VM2imp.

I may have to get a Terrapin to range past 3000yards, I never thought I would need to

 

[fmajor]

Jeffvn, I agree, this rifle is about performance to me. I wanted to go farther. I was hoping to get to 3K with decent repeatability and a degree of accuracy. My PLRF10 will range to 2990 yards. I now feel I have a rifle to get me there. I think I will go ahead and talk to Shawn about getting a second barrel on order and start it now. Then the barrel swap will be a shorter process. I have owned barrel burners before and found that they are not best used as the every day rifle. But with my 6br and 300 win to shoot most often I hope to get along fine with the new 338. I am sure at some point whether it is a year or 3 years I will need a replacement barrel.

Jeff

Ha ha! Maybe you're gonna have to call Kirby for a 338 Allen Mag! OK, Shawn can prolly get a the reamer, but still - that's a whole lotta brass!

 

[JeffVN]

Jeff

Agreed. I currently have chambered and threaded barrels ready to go for my 7 Dakotas and the 338LM Improved (plus barrel blanks in 6mm, 7mm, and 338). When I bought the currently installed barrels I had a spare chambered and threaded at the same time. I have a barrel vice and action wrenches so the swap is not problematic. Keeping ready spares reduced my stress on the whole "barrel needs replaced" situation. I know some folks can't afford the extra cost or have the ability to store them for a long period of time, but if you can I find it makes life easier when you approach the end of a barrel.

For me the 7 WSMs (I have 2) and the 7 Dakotas (I have 2) are the daily shooters at my home range (goes to 950 yards on armor steel plates, and has a known-distance range to 1,000 yards). The 338 LM Improved is reserved for when I go to the desert. So far, I have not taken anything close to the end of my PLRF10s reach; I have a road that limits my current location to roughly 2,350 yards. The guys I shoot with will likely not ever need to go beyond the 2,350 yards that we have on this location, but you never know.

Jeffvn

 

[Archery1973]

Jeffvn, I agree, this rifle is about performance to me. I wanted to go farther. I was hoping to get to 3K with decent repeatability and a degree of accuracy. My PLRF10 will range to 2990 yards. I now feel I have a rifle to get me there. I think I will go ahead and talk to Shawn about getting a second barrel on order and start it now. Then the barrel swap will be a shorter process. I have owned barrel burners before and found that they are not best used as the every day rifle. But with my 6br and 300 win to shoot most often I hope to get along fine with the new 338. I am sure at some point whether it is a year or 3 years I will need a replacement barrel.

Jeff

Has anybody shot out a barrel yet? I know Shawn was hoping for his to make it 1000 rounds. I really want a .338 + P and trying to gauge what I should expect from barrel life.

 

[jskmtd]

How are you liking the MOAR reticle after using it for awhile?

 

[Broz]

Has anybody shot out a barrel yet? I know Shawn was hoping for his to make it 1000 rounds. I really want a .338 + P and trying to gauge what I should expect from barrel life.

No not that I know of. I am sure that the Terminator will have a shorter barrel life to some degree over the Edge. It stands to reason more velocity will equal less life. How much remains to be seen. I know Shawn tested the 338 EDGE and sent one out to be shot for a while before he even offered the +P chambering. I think that rifle is still going and has not been re-barreled yet. Someone correct me if I am wrong.

One needs to understand this. There is no free lunch. A 338 sending a 300 gr bullet at 3100 or 3200 fps is a serious long range rifle. These rifles come with many benefits over a 338 sending the same bullet at 2750 or 2800. Just like a performance engine, with horse power comes more frequent maintenance.

I will tell you all this, I am taking great care to keep the barrel cool. But I am running full house loads. I am documenting every shot. One day I will be able to share when I had to re-barrel. Until then I am really liking the less dial up, extended ranges, less dial in for wind, and the very evident energy it delivers to a target.

Jeff

 

[Broz]

How are you liking the MOAR reticle after using it for awhile?

I need to do some more research on this. But I suspect the MOAR's are different thickness in the NXS's and ATACR's I have used. They just look thicker in the NXS. I need to confirm for sure the thicknesses.

To answer your question I am getting along fine with the MOAR in the ATACR, I still would like to see a thinner floating crosshair, but it is working fine for the distances I have been shooting.

Jeff

 

[sendero72]

I need to do some more research on this. But I suspect the MOAR's are different thickness in the NXS's and ATACR's I have used. They just look thicker in the NXS. I need to confirm for sure the thicknesses.

To answer your question I am getting along fine with the MOAR in the ATACR, I still would like to see a thinner floating crosshair, but it is working fine for the distances I have been shooting.

Jeff

Amen on the "thinner" crosshair.

 

[Kiwi Greg]

I need to do some more research on this. But I suspect the MOAR's are different thickness in the NXS's and ATACR's I have used. They just look thicker in the NXS. I need to confirm for sure the thicknesses.

To answer your question I am getting along fine with the MOAR in the ATACR, I still would like to see a thinner floating crosshair, but it is working fine for the distances I have been shooting.

Jeff

I'm with you on that Jeff.

From memory it didn't apear to be any bigger than the Premiers reticle, which is supposed to be 0.1 moa.

I would also prefer a slightly finer centre.

 

[lovdasnow]

Ya. The moar is thicker than the nxs crosshairs we're used to. Nightforce has heard the complaints and the rumor is they are making a new moar in the thickness of the nxs's.

Broz. How's it shooting so far? What kind of groups are you getting? Is load work up going well, and is it different working with +P?

Thanks for your feedback.