Preliminary results LOST RIVER 162 Gr 7 MM J40 Ballistics

[daveosok]

Rifle type
Remington action, trued and blueprinted bolt lugs lapped
Caliber
7 MM STW
Barrel
Lilja 34 inch Stainless Steel 4 groove 1:9 twist
Stock
Choate Ultimate Sniper, bedded
Firing Pin
Speedlock firing pin and spring
Trigger
Remington, precision ground, 1.5 lb pull
Muzzle break
Custom my design
OVER ALL LENGTH info
OAL 3.042 (Stoney Point measurement tool)
TIP TO BASE
OAL 3.755
All bullets seated at lands.

Temperature 50 degrees
Barometer 30.34 in steady
Humidity 54%
Dewpoint 34
Altitude 429 ft

Distance for tests 200 yards measured.
All groups 5 shot groups or as noted otherwise. All cases Remington, all primers Fedral Match 215'3.
Oehler 35p used for velocity results 25 feet in front of muzzle.

FIRST GROUP
POWDER RL - 19
GRAINS 71.4
AVG VEL 3347
HIGH VEL 3382
LOW VEL 3314
GROUP SIZE 2.265 2 fliers

SECOND GROUP
POWDER H4831
GRAINS 74.0
AVG VEL 3315
HIGH VEL 3334
LOW VEL 3328
GROUP SIZE 3.125

THRID GROUP
POWDER N560
GRAINS 75.0
AVG VEL 3460
HIGH VEL 3493
LOW VEL 3428
GROUP SIZE 1 **3 SHOT GROUP

FOURTH GROUP
POWDER N165
GRAINS 77.0
AVG VEL 3442
HIGH VEL 3479
LOW VEL 3411
GROUP SIZE 1.0 2FLIERS*CAUTION TIGHT BOLT

FIFTH GROUP
POWDER RL-25
GRAINS 80.0
AVG VEL 3524
HIGH VEL 3556
LOW VEL 3495
GROUP SIZE 3.5 CAUTION TIGHT BOLT

SIXTH GROUP
POWDER H1000
GRAINS 81.0
AVG VEL 3415
HIGH VEL 3429
LOW VEL 3402
GROUP SIZE 1.375 2 FLIERS

SEVENTH GROUP
POWDER H870
GRAINS 92.0
AVG VEL 3426
HIGH VEL 3471
LOW VEL 3406
GROUP SIZE 1.125 2 FLIERS

8TH GROUP ****168 GRAIN JLK'S****
POWDER RAMSHOT MAGNUM
GRAINS 79.0
AVG VEL 3197
HIGH VEL 3223
LOW VEL 3173
GROUP SIZE 2 2 FLIERS

9TH GROUP ****168 GRAIN SMK'S****
POWDER RAMSHOT MAGNUM
GRAINS 79.0
AVG VEL 3171
HIGH VEL 3191
LOW VEL 3147
GROUP SIZE .625 2 FLIERS
More testing should produce tighter groups.

N560 showed the best possibilities with more load development.
Overall conclusion Lost River Bullets will work, however it will cost you and arm and a leg to find the right loads if you dont get lucky the first go around.

When working up loads with this same rifle using Berger 180 grain I used load data from Accurate Reloader website.

More load development should produce better groups with LRBT.
My thoughts are for the cost and what they claim to be able to do (LRBT) the Bergers win hands down as they required no bank loan to procure enough bullets for testing purposes.

I do like the LRBT and will order some more but for the low budget reloader, he or she may see better gains using Sierra, Berger, or JLK's. Lost River Bullets require finicky settings and I'm sure I will dump a few hundred into buying more to find the correct load.

**********DISCLAIMER************
Information contained herein should be used as a reference only and all loads should be started 15% below stated weight.
This information is factual and centers around my rifle, results will vary with other rifles.

 

[Brent]

Dave, do you pull out and mark the cases that produce fliers to see if they repeat this the next time?

How come you approach the development with multiple powders first?
Did you work up to the loads with each powder and then shoot these groups after?
Assuming your single feeding because of the 3.75" oal, you might try seating some deeper, one of my guns loaded long to the lands always opens up groups by about 2 more inches no mater what bullet I'm using. I found it strange, but seat them deep again and it's back to tight groups.

 

[daveosok]

Well Brent I only had 40 bullets to work with. 7 of the groups I did were LRBT bullets.
Thats 7 different powders, imagin buying enough bullets to do exactly what you suggested and work up each powder for each bullet. Then seating depth yeah theres another 100 or so bullets.
I wanted to test a lot of them and see what might be worth while investigating before I headed off to buy 500 more bullets for testing purposes.
At 14.60 a box it can get real expensive really quick. I was searching for the needle in the haystack hopeing to have something show signs of possibilities.
I will try and few more powders and set ups first before I go and start messing with seating depth.
The way I do my loads is
first set the bullet to the lands
second try as many different powders as possible set to mean (64.5 grains - 74.5 grains middle is 69.5) load data
thrid record velocity and group size and compare for possible continuing loads
Then I come back and set up for different powder (working with the mean) loads for the bullets that showed signs of interest.
Once I get the right powder and group size then I go to seating depth.
If you mess with to many things at once when working up loads youll never know wahts causing your loads to do what they are doing leaving you in the dark in my opinion.
Brent one more thing,
Have you ever tried to stuff a solid further into the lands? I have the Stoney Point tool for measureing bullet seating depth. With a slight tap from a hammer would be the only way to seat these LRBT deeper, they are solid and are made of different material composition and thus far have a lot harder RC than regular jacketed bullets. Seating deeper may present probelms when loading rounds as seating it deeper would engage the bullet into the lands with such a restraint that bolt operation maybe become difficult as you could possibly be trying to turn the case while the bullet is stationary.

[ 12-10-2002: Message edited by: daveosok ]

[ 12-10-2002: Message edited by: daveosok ]

 

[Brent]

Dave,
I meant to seat deeper into the "case" not into the lands.

It turned out for me that my magazine fed rounds shot better than the longer ones that never fit the mag.

BH,
The method you mention is the one I use, called the "OCW" or Optimal Charge Weight. Boyd I think, convinced me to try .5gr increments with the larger cases and I'm glad I did, it worked probably better and costs alot less too. I think I ran six bullets under an inch at 300 yards in one groove and 5 on another bullet too, both were very evident sweet spots. The others were equally evident that they were not! I work on the OAL after the best charge weight is verified, moving away from the lands .005" at a time out to .030" if the mag length permits contact at all from the beginning anyway. My 300 Ultra has between .080-.1" jump no matter what bullet used so it's a moot point with it. I start with a powder that would give around top velocity and is temperature stable, if it doesn't give good good groups or ES is too wide I'll move to a faster powder if a different primer doesn't fix it. I'm going to try the 210 primer and see how it works with the 220 SMKs today.

 

[daveosok]

I understand what your saying. Have you seen how long these LRBT are? Seating it deeper in the case would put a lenghty amount inside the case. This may lead to overpressure signs ealier than if it were seated out further.

Bounty Hunter
I understand what your saying also. That is the way I did the Berger 180 VLD, BUT I was able to find loading data for them.
These LRBT have long shank lengths so using data for 162 grain can be dangerous.
I cannot find any loading data for these LRBT bullets, so I had to start from scratch using load data for 162 grain standard style jacketed bullets minus 15% of the standard load.
The other issue is I can buy 100 Berger 180 VLD bullets for 21 dollars, LRBT are 14.60 for 20.
Accurate reloading lists load data for the 162 gr AMAX.
72 grains of RL-22 to 78.5 max.
Using your suggestion for .2 grain increments is 32.5 different testing loads.
I would need 33 bullets for this one powder.
I used 7 and still have powders I havent used.
I would need 231 LRBT to perform tests to find the perfect load that my rifle likes.
168 dollars worth of bullets.
I could get around 800 bergers for that price.
I did seven loads and found two likely candidates for further testing. I will use the .2 grain increments then on the ones that showed possible promise of better accuracy.
See what I'm talking about now when these LRBT are concerned. If I had money laying around of course I would order 500 of these bullets and spend ample time to finding the best accuracy loads.
As it sits now, with no loading data available, starting from scratch is the only way I can go. I understand what you said about "Most of the time we have a good idea which powder and bullet we want/think will work well to use anyway. " in this case with no load data available and shank length being so long using data for standard 162 needed to be started at much lower load weight.

 

[Nighthawk]

If you need load data, give Warren a call.

 

[daveosok]

I did, he just told me that you need to push them at a certain velocity with respect to twist ratio.

 

[Nighthawk]

daveosok,can you give me a little more info on that?

 

[BountyHunter]

Daveosok

Just food for thought. I have found when in a time crunch or bullet crunch, try the ladder (audette) method of load development. One powder, one bullet, one primer. Most of the time we have a good idea which powder and bullet we want/think will work well to use anyway. Normally I only use Federal primers. Now on LR (single shot) guns I start seating about 1/2 the measurable "jam" mark and that gives me only one way to come, out of the lands. Clean paper target at 200-400 yds one aim point at bottom. Got to zero on dot at bottom of target with starting load, so make 3-5 of that charge bullet. Fire one bullet each time at .2 gr increments on powder. Bullets will move up the target and then tend to cluster into small group for 2-4 shots and then move on up. In 15-20 shots you will find 2-4 sweet spots that shoots well within a powder charge range of .2-4 gr. You must plot each rd on sep sheet of paper (good spotting scope) and record MV. When you look at results pretty easy to pick load at MV you want, that your barrel likes. then just fine tune powder and seating depth. Within the 15-20 shots of a ladder and 3-6 more groups you have a load that your guns shoots very well at MV you want. Saves me from shooting 10-15 three to five shot groups and get same results on which powder load. Still have to work seating, but only coming out, not in and out.

As a rule most LR BR shooters have found Sierras like just kissing the lands and the VLDs (Bergers and JLK)like .010-.025 in the lands. That is why I start well in and come out. I would assume the LRBT bullets shoot best well into lands also.

BH

 

[daveosok]

I cant remember I'll have to call him again or send him an email. I may have it at home in an email also but not sure. Whatever the velocity requirements were I exceeded them with all of the loads.
Maybe if hes reading this message board he can tell us.
I would like to see on his site a comparision of twist ratios and velocity requirements for each bullet.

 

[Brent]

Dave, I was not thinking about them being extra long like that, skipped my mind. If the base is seated into the case to the same depth as say, the A-Max, whatever that depth is, do you think that load data for the A-Max could be real close?

I was going to finally load up some 220gr SMKs in the 300 Ultra and shoot today but it snowed all day. I got ready to load them anyway but couldn't find any data with RL25, so I'll call Sierra in the morning. I figured somewhere around 90gr to be max but just couldn't find a mass of loads on the net to make me feel comfortable at 90. I'll load in a range on up just over max, checking for groupings and velocity irregularities.

 

[BountyHunter]

Daveosok

you are right that if you do not have at least a close idea on what the powder range is to go to larger spreads such as .3-.5 grains and obviously on the larger cases Still the method works far superior to any other method to quickly find sweet spots within a given MV range for that barrel. Given your 6.5 grain spread with .4 increments you only need 16 bullets to cover the entire range. Firing 3 shot groups to cover the spread at the same .4 interval you use 48 bullets and that is one powder and one bullet. No matter what, it is a faster and less expensive way to completely cover a powder range and find the sweet spots. Otherwise it is a lot more time and expense to cover the same range for each powder bullet combo.

I have just found that this is much more systematic, faster and more accurately covers the spectrum of possible loads for a rifle better than any other method I have seen. No matter what cartridge, we can normally pick 2-3 powders that will work and 2-3 bullets. Out of that we only have to shoot a max of 4-9 ladders of 15-20 shots versus 144 of the 3-5 shot groups to cover the same powder ranges and get us to the same point of where we are fine tuning a load that we know will work. Samething, if we start in the lands, all we have to do is come out at whatever interval you want to use. I had used the 3-5 shot group method and constantly chased a proven load for weeks and months. Until I started this, I never had confidence that I had found the "best" load for a given bullet powder combo. With 150 pieces of brass, I can shoot the 9 ladders in one afternoon and be fine tuning loads the next day. Othewise, you are shooting 3-5 shot groups for months unless you get lucky or tired and say that is good enough.

We at least end up with a load that will shoot. We can continue to test other powder bullet combos and see if we can find something that will beat it, but we are shooting a proven load until then.

Finally, what is the cost versus benefit of the LRBTs? Are you realistically going to be shooting distances and cartridge combos where the ballistics with them is offering you a marked advantage. In other words is 4"-10" less drop at your given range worth the cost. Do not know, but something to consider. Having said that, I will say I have not used them, know people who do and like them. I think they offer a ballistics advantage at the ultra LR ranges if their accuracy will hold up in your gun, but with rangefinders I am not sure you gain any advantage. I just cannot figure out a significent advantage for me given my circumstances and hunting conditions and their cost.

Good luck

BH

 

[Brent]

I agree with Bountyhunter too. The thing I don't like about using more than one powder at a time with one load is that you could be one or two grains off from a bughole grouping load but it is nowhere close to that at the load your testing. The other thing is that the load that looks the best might also be the best it can be right there at that load and never get better while leading you away from a powder that has much more potential, but just didn't group well at the only charge wt you tested. When you test a spread of charge weights with the ladder method on a given powder it will reveal the load range talored to that barrel quickly with more complete and usable data. I pick a powder I want to use and test it first, if the lacking velocity or something else pushes me to another powder only then do I switch, and usually I never need to even do this more than once.

 

[daveosok]

My point is, their isnt any load data for this particular bullet style.
You could use say H1000 and never get that bunghole group and then continue through the powder selection buying more bullets.

I found two powders that warrent more investigations for accuracy potential.
I could have loaded up however many rounds in one powder and not found any of them to be accurate.
This gave me a starting point and I got lucky finding two powders that may result in better accuracy.
I will then do the .2 grain increments and work the loads that way.
The other thought was to get information out on load data since you cant find it anywhere.
This may lead to others not having to go through powder selections and finding the right combo.
This has gone the wrong way actually, it was meant to be informative so that people who use these style bullets or wanted to know about them with load data can do up loads with the powder I used without having to go through hundreds of dollars.
Like I said before, I did exactly what you suggested with the Berger bullets and picked one powder, but I had LOAD data.