Part 1 of 2: Testing 243 Winchester with Win 780, IMR 7828 and Alliant RL 17

merbeau

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2011
Messages
193
While my main purpose was to start building a load for my 338 RUM, I noticed on Hodgdon's reloading center that Win 780 and IMR 7828 (that is identified for the 338) are also published for the 243 Winchester. I wanted to compare it to my Nosler factory 87 grain partition which shoots 0.8 MOA. And since I had some Alliant RL 17 it was included into the mix.

Rifle is a 243 Winchester configured in a 1964 Browning Safari having a walnut stock with a free floated 22 inch barrel and a twist of 1:10; Browning bases and rings were used along with a Nikon A0 6.5x to 20 scope.

One case was selected and two slits were made in the neck and a bullet was inserted and slowly closed into the chamber. The bolt then was opened carefully and the case/bullet removed. This is supposedly the point of bullet touching the lands which was a COAL of 2.6995 inches. Berger's web site states that this bullet is not seating depth sensitive so a depth of 0.01 off the lands (about average range in the literature from 0.005 to 0.066) which gave good seating stability, no compressed charges and still functioned in the magazine.

All testing with powder was started at 0.5 grains less than the maximum load and then 3 grains in 1 grain increments for testing. For example, the maximum listed for Win 780 is 48.0 grains and testing started at 45.5, 46.5, and 47.5. If a good load was identified for example 46.5 then another test was conducted at 46 and 47 grains to see if there was any improvement. Accuracy was predominant over velocity.

Brass used in the testing was Nosler custom. The bullet used was Berger's 95 grain hybrid hunting bullet with an advertised G1 BC of 0.427 and 1.07 inches length. Primer used was Winchester Large Rifle. The bullet was seated half way into the case and then rotated 180 degrees to help with keeping bullet run out minimal. Run out was measured with Sinclair concentricity gauge and anything greater than 0.002 was rejected.
All testing was done at 100 yards using Bald Eagle match rest and "Protektor (brand name) leaf back rest. Groups with no vertical difference were preferred. If, for example, there were two identical groups but one was vertically distributed and the other horizontal, the horizontal was selected as the best load. Three shot groups were used in testing except when changing powders a fouling shot was included.

At testing Win 780 gave a good hunting group of 1.0 MOA at 45.5 grains. Upon testing IMR 7828, at 44 grains a 0.7 MOA was produced and testing at 45 grains essentially produced a 0.4 group and it was obvious this rifle likes 7828. For RL 17 results were at 40.5 grains a 0.2 MOA group was produced (Fig 1). This group was essentially repeated in another testing where the temperature was 50 degrees cooler using 4 shots (Fig 2). The rifle likes RL 17 slightly better than 7828. This load was then chronographed and came in at 2966 fps. Alliant RL 17 was selected as my go to load.
 

Attachments

  • Fig 1 Test 1 RL 17.JPG
    Fig 1 Test 1 RL 17.JPG
    59 KB · Views: 159
  • Fig 2 Test 2 RL 17.JPG
    Fig 2 Test 2 RL 17.JPG
    49.1 KB · Views: 264
Step your testing back 100-200yds. I've loaded many 'o' great shooting loads that fell apart as the distance grew for one reason or another. 200yds is good, 300 is better.

Just my .002 & thank you for sharing your experiences.



t
 
Step your testing back 100-200yds. I've loaded many 'o' great shooting loads that fell apart as the distance grew for one reason or another. 200yds is good, 300 is better.

Just my .002 & thank you for sharing your experiences.
t

That is a good idea. Our club has a 200 and 250 range.

Thanks

Robert
 
You're welcome, just trying to help another gent NOT make the same mistakes I did.


Let us know how they shoot at 250.


t
 
You're welcome, just trying to help another gent NOT make the same mistakes I did.


Let us know how they shoot at 250.


t

To be honest I almost did not submit the work because what load combination is successful for one gun more than likely will not provide the same results in another so it is kind of like old news.

The brass issue, however, caused me to look for some options and certainly longer range testing will show any issues. For example, according to the Berger website the 1:10 twist is marginally stable for this bullet while JBS indicates stability. Looking closer show both sites use the same equation but different criteria for stability. I would image if the bullet is yawing it will show up at longer ranges.
 
To be honest I almost did not submit the work because what load combination is successful for one gun more than likely will not provide the same results in another so it is kind of like old news.

The brass issue, however, caused me to look for some options and certainly longer range testing will show any issues. For example, according to the Berger website the 1:10 twist is marginally stable for this bullet while JBS indicates stability. Looking closer show both sites use the same equation but different criteria for stability. I would image if the bullet is yawing it will show up at longer ranges.

The JBM twist calculator is little different from Berger. Main difference is you have to put in your elevation your shooting at and 0 is sea level and about 3500 ft elevation that 95gr Berger would be stable.

I have Browning Safari that I got new but has 1/10 twist 24" Kreiger barrel and been shooting that Berger 95gr Classic bullet. I've been using Berger data with IMR-7828SSC and H-4350.

Range I'm shooting at little over 5500ft.

Well good luck
 
Yes you are correct Berger uses altitude and ballistic coefficient but Berger also uses the military standard of 1.5 (Miller factor) for whether or not the bullet is stable whereas JBS uses anything greater than 1.3 for stability. And Berger's output provides what they call correction for stability and for at least my input the output indicated about 3% error as corrected. What is ironic (at least to me) is Berger advertises a 1:10 twist as a minimum for this bullet but then when you run the calculation they come up with a 1:9 twist. I am not at 5500 ft but at 810 ft above sea level.
 
Yes you are correct Berger uses altitude and ballistic coefficient but Berger also uses the military standard of 1.5 (Miller factor) for whether or not the bullet is stable whereas JBS uses anything greater than 1.3 for stability. And Berger's output provides what they call correction for stability and for at least my input the output indicated about 3% error as corrected. What is ironic (at least to me) is Berger advertises a 1:10 twist as a minimum for this bullet but then when you run the calculation they come up with a 1:9 twist. I am not at 5500 ft but at 810 ft above sea level.

I have no idea what JBS uses but I do know what JBM uses. In your case maybe a 1/10 twist won't work and on box of bullets they do mention 1/10 or faster twist. Berger done the same with 87gr hunting VLD and 90gr target BTHP 1/10 twist or faster. All three of those bullet within .025" in length.
 
You're welcome, just trying to help another gent NOT make the same mistakes I did.


Let us know how they shoot at 250.


t

Update testing at 250 yards and full length sizing

Went to rifle range and conditions were probably ideal. Temperature 60 degrees F, relative humidity was 35%, barometric pressure was 30.29, elevation 810 ft, clear skies and the wind flags were limp. After reading some more it seems there is always an argument of 3 versus 5 shot groups. This test used a 5 shot string with the virgin brass load and a wait time of 5 minutes between shots was utilized. Fig A shows the results. The rounds moved left to right with the first shot the extreme left and the fifth shot the extreme right. Center to center from left to right is 1.4 inches.

After all the discussion the consensus appears to use full length sizing instead of neck sizing and then minor adjustment of the load established for the virgin brass. Once fired cases where full length re sized and then powder charge of Alliant RL 17 at 40.5 was adjusted +/- 0.2 grains. Fig B provides the results and the best test was Alliant RL 17 at 40.3 grains.

At this point in time I need to wait until the new mandrel comes in for my full length dies and then a couple of more tests.

Robert

 

Attachments

  • Fig A 5 shot group 250 yards.JPG
    Fig A 5 shot group 250 yards.JPG
    40.4 KB · Views: 172
  • Fig B Alliant RL 40.3.jpg
    Fig B Alliant RL 40.3.jpg
    42.1 KB · Views: 181
Warning! This thread is more than 10 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.
Top