Chasing 223 / Slowing down UPDATE: # 29 w/ pic

[jelenko]

I think their point was the 14.5" bbl was the problem. ...it doesn't produce good stability / group size at 100 yds, but at 3 / 5 / 600 yd, g-t-g. They recommended a longer bbl for 100 yd groups.

No offense, but... I'll take their word over the interwebz word.

Wait. You're calling the Stability calculator that Bryan Litz built as 'interwebz word'? Have you looked at the stability calculator?

 

[garandman]

Wait. You're calling the Stability calculator that Bryan Litz built as 'interwebz word'? Have you looked at the stability calculator?

No.

I'm saying JP is factoring in barrel length where that calculator does not.

JP Rifles has an actual, in the field, track record of success in building rifles that shoot.

I'm *very* hesitant to imagine they don't know what they are talking about.

 

[jelenko]

Many of the people who have responded to this thread have as much or more experience than a tech at JP AND they are not trying to sell anything.

As others have said a few times, stability is determined by the stability factor -i.e., fps, barrel twist, weight of the bullet and it's length - not by the length of the barrel.

Honestly, I'm beginning to wonder why you posted the question. You don't seem to be interested in the answers.

 

[garandman]

Many of the people who have responded to this thread have as much or more experience than a tech at JP AND they are not trying to sell anything.

As others have said a few times, stability is determined by the stability factor -i.e., fps, barrel twist, weight of the bullet and it's length - not by the length of the barrel.

Honestly, I'm beginning to wonder why you posted the question. You don't seem to be interested in the answers.

Techs build guns. JP techs build actual guns that actually shoot very well. Much more so than mathematicians, engineers and theoretical experts.

I'll take redneck hicks that know what the second amendment means over professional politicians with doctorates, too.

Chill. We agree that a 14.5 bbl should be shooting WAAAYY better than 1.5 - 2" groups at 100yd, which is what I'm getting..

 

[natdscott]

Edit. Nate realized it probably didn’t matter what he typed anyway, lengthy or not.

The short version is:

Ask. Listen. Think. Respond.

 

[garandman]

Brother, you are quickly writing checks with your keyboard that you have already admitted your skills and equipment can’t cash.



Listen, and then maybe you will see what AR precision looks like.

-Nate

I'm not building a precision AR.

Maybe if you calm down and read more carefully to actually understand what I'm asking, you wouldn't be so hostile.

 

[natdscott]

I'm not building a precision AR.

Maybe if you calm down and read more carefully to actually understand what I'm asking, you wouldn't be so hostile.

Actually, I don’t give a shit. But some of the guys you are LECTURING I know to be both good shooters, and also too nice to tell you what I did.

I know what you’re doin, and I read it all. A lot of questions and falsehoods and clarifications came to my mind, and not ONLY from your posts.

But I can’t seem to see why I should feel compelled to render assistance.

 

[garandman]

But I can’t seem to see why I should feel compelled to render assistance.

I free you from any obligation to continue reading / posting here. In fact... please don't..

Capiche' ?

 

[garandman]

***UPDATE***: So the working theory/guess was a lighter weight bullet going a little slower might stabilize better. What I took from JP's comments was a 77 grain might stabilize in a 14.5: 1:7... and it might not… you just got a try it. Generally speaking, What works in one gun may not necessarily work in every single gun everywhere ever. Especially in gas guns.Waaaayy too many variables.

So did some testing this morning…. 69 grain SMK over CFC 223.

It is just 2 groups but if I can reproduce what I did here I'm happy as a pig in slop.

 

[BasicMagic]

So the working theory/guess was a lighter weight bullet going a little slower might stabilize better. What I took from JP's comments was a 77 grain might stabilize and it might not… you just got a try it. Generally speaking, What works in one gun may not necessarily work in every single gun everywhere ever. Especially in gas guns.Waaaayy too many variables.

So did some testing this morning…. 69 grain SMK over CFC 223.

It is just 2 groups but if I can reproduce what I did here I'm happy as a pig in slop.

Did you adjust your scope at all during this load dev? Because you have a 1/2 to 3/4 POI shift between the 24.6 and 25.0 group. You may want to shoot again in a grain range of 24.5 up to hodgdon max charge of 25.8 (or even higher if wylde chamber). With light profile barrels and temp sensitive powders (cfe223 is infamously temp sensitive) you want to load well away from POI shifts.

May not be an issue if the gun is shorter range focused as a 14.5 barrel with a 1-6 likely is. But just so you are aware POI shifts are a huge source of inaccuracy with quality light barrels. Bad groups with my buddies pencil 30-06 were 2", POI shifts between .4gn increment charges were as sometimes as bad as more than 1"

If you load too close to a POI shift with a temp sensitive powder that nice .5 moa group could start printing where the charge above or below printed at. Which turns it back to moa or more real quick.

 

[garandman]

Edit. Nate realized it probably didn’t matter what he typed anyway, lengthy or not.

The short version is:

Ask. Listen. Think. Respond.

Somebody tell Nate if he'd posted that from the start, rather than his off topic, emo rant about building a precision AR (when (1) the gun is already built (2) I clearly indicated a 14.5" bbl which is NOT a precision AR and (3) I actually asked reloading questions as this is a reloading forum , not a gun building forum ) ....if he'd posted what's immed above instead.... I'd have liked his post and moved on. Cuz I agree with that.

But instead he talked down to me like I'm his child or something, and went on and on about intersting info.... that's totally off topic here. Of course he edited and deleted his off topic rant, so.... that's kinda the end of that. Thankfully.

 

[garandman]

Did you adjust your scope at all during this load dev? Because you have a 1/2 to 3/4 POI shift between the 24.6 and 25.0 group. You may want to shoot again in a grain range of 24.5 up to hodgdon max charge of 25.8 (or even higher if wylde chamber). With light profile barrels and temp sensitive powders (cfe223 is infamously temp sensitive) you want to load well away from POI shifts.

May not be an issue if the gun is shorter range focused as a 14.5 barrel with a 1-6 likely is. But just so you are aware POI shifts are a huge source of inaccuracy with quality light barrels. Bad groups with my buddies pencil 30-06 were 2", POI shifts between .4gn increment charges were as sometimes as bad as more than 1"

If you load too close to a POI shift with a temp sensitive powder that nice .5 moa group could start printing where the charge above or below printed at. Which turns it back to moa or more real quick.

No adjust. Same zero. I've often had zero shifts in different loads, even with my bolt guns. I've had slight zero shifts in same load same gun on different days. Even with Nightforce and high end scopes. I re-zero every gun every time I shoot.

As noted on the target...I'm going from a cold, clean bore, so the "shift" doesn't surprise me. Could well be just the bore getting appropriately fouled, and the grps tightening down. Its roughly the same zero, after shot 6, with the one far left outlier (#6) on that upper left bull.

But you are quite right.... I plan to re-test in 0.2 gr increments from 24.4 to 25.2....and see what happens. Not its a process of trying to "falsify" one good group.

 

[BasicMagic]

No adjust. Same zero. I've often had zero shifts in different loads, even with my bolt guns. I've had slight zero shifts in same load same gun on different days. Even with Nightforce and high end scopes. I re-zero every gun every time I shoot.

As noted on the target...I'm going from a cold, clean bore, so the "shift" doesn't surprise me. Could well be just the bore getting appropriately fouled. Its roughly the same zero, after shot 7, with the one far left outlier on that upper left bull.

I plan to re-test in 0.2 gr increments from 24.4 to 25.2....and see what happens

Its not zero shift on different days and different conditions that are concerns for load dev. All loads will be shifted as such. Its POI shifts on same day same conditions with the only thing changing is the load. Those are a concern.

Fouling can change POI and even if you combine the 24.6 and 25.0 group you are right around MOA which is probably quite acceptable for the rifles purpose.

Did you chrony these rounds?

I would expand you load range up a little. I would take it up to hodgdon max of 25.8. see if there is some bad group or serious POI shift just above your 24.8 expected load.

 

[garandman]

Its not zero shift on different days and different conditions that are concerns for load dev. All loads will be shifted as such. Its POI shifts on same day same conditions with the only thing changing is the load. Those are a concern.

Fouling can change POI and even if you combine the 24.6 and 25.0 group you are right around MOA which is probably quite acceptable for the rifles purpose.

Did you chrony these rounds?

I would expand you load range up a little. I would take it up to hodgdon max of 25.8. see if there is some bad group or serious POI shift just above your 24.8 expected load.

No chrony. Yet. And yes, I'll re-re-re-test.

I've done this before. Like a half dozen different calibers, in some 10 different guns, with too many loads to count anymore. I am sceptical of one good group.

Several others advised me to stay away from charge maximums on temp sensitive powders. I did this load development at 72 deg and I rarely shoot below 45 deg or above 85 deg. Still.... I'll prolly look for a temp stable ball powder once I'm sure 69s can shoot well from this bbl.

 

[Doom]

Your powder increments are two big. Nodes in 223 are typically about 0.6 gr apart and are typically +/-.1 gr wide. Shoot 24.8, 25, and 25.2 and see if you POI remains close to the same point. I would seriously recommend that you you research OCW and Dan Newberry.

OCW reloading instructions

OCW reloading overview and instructions

www.ocwreloading.com

For 300 yd there is no reason to push the loading to max unless you just like buying brass.

 

[garandman]

Your powder increments are two big. Nodes in 223 are typically about 0.6 gr apart and are typically +/-.1 gr wide. Shoot 24.8, 25, and 25.2 and see if you POI remains close to the same point. I would seriously recommend that you you research OCW and Dan Newberry.

OCW reloading instructions

OCW reloading overview and instructions

www.ocwreloading.com

For 300 yd there is no reason to push the loading to max unless you just like buying brass.

Wait.... I said I'm gonna do 0.2 gr increments. Then you recommended 0.2 gr increments....???

If you mean the target (pic) ....this was just a "flyer" to see what the 69s would do....not a full test. (There's a whole back story of frustration with the 77gr SMKs in another thread) That pic was just to see if they were any better. I'll be doing a full test of 24.4 to 25.2 gr in 0.2 increments.

And I'm familiar with the OCW method. Tried it once, not sure what I learned.

My process of 0.2 gr increments of different powders with different bullets., then playing with teh seating depth of teh best one has always worked for me.

 

[BasicMagic]

Several others advised me to stay away from charge maximums on temp sensitive powders. I did this load development at 72 deg and I rarely shoot below 45 deg or above 85 deg. Still.... I'll prolly look for a temp stable ball powder once I'm sure 69s can shoot well from this bbl.

Yes that is correct. If using a temp sensitive powder either do your load dev when its super hot out (thats what i did with my 75 bthp tac load) or leave some room for pressure increase due to temp.

Temp stable ball powders do not exist. Best you can do is staball 6.5 but that is too slow for 223 rem.

H335 or TAC would be my suggestion. Also aa2520 may work but haven't tried it myself.

 

[garandman]

Yes that is correct. If using a temp sensitive powder either do your load dev when its super hot out (thats what i did with my 75 bthp tac load) or leave some room for pressure increase due to temp.

Temp stable ball powders do not exist. Best you can do is staball 6.5 but that is too slow for 223 rem.

H335 or TAC would be my suggestion. Also aa2520 may work but haven't tried it myself.

Thanx.

 

[jrh84]

Somebody tell Nate if he'd posted that from the start, rather than his off topic, emo rant about building a precision AR (when (1) the gun is already built (2) I clearly indicated a 14.5" bbl which is NOT a precision AR and (3) I actually asked reloading questions as this is a reloading forum , not a gun building forum ) ....if he'd posted what's immed above instead.... I'd have liked his post and moved on. Cuz I agree with that.

But instead he talked down to me like I'm his child or something, and went on and on about intersting info.... that's totally off topic here. Of course he edited and deleted his off topic rant, so.... that's kinda the end of that. Thankfully.

All this load development sounds awfully similar to what you'd hear from people doing load development on...a precision AR. Doesn't matter the barrel length or your intended uses for it, if you're loading for accuracy, the same principles apply.

Nate is a great guy, and knows his stuff on AR's, loading for them, and pointing them. He's generally got some good advice to offer because he's been there and done that when it comes to accurate AR's.

All that being said, the 77 Sierra is a great bullet, and so is the 69 smk. If you can't make either one of those bullets shoot, I'd be taking a look at the rifle. I'd be surprised if the cheapest of the cheap 1:8 or 1:7 twist barrels couldn't do 1 moa with either.

I know JP makes good stuff, but I have to disagree with his assessment of a 14.5" stabilizing a 77. If a 1:7 20" service rifle can stabilize 80s, 88 elds and 90 vlds, I have full confidence that you're getting all the stability you need for a 77 in a 1:7 14.5". I wouldn't think twice about a 14.5" 1:8 for that matter.

 

[garandman]

All this load development sounds awfully similar to what you'd hear from people doing load development on...a precision AR. Doesn't matter the barrel length or your intended uses for it, if you're loading for accuracy, the same principles apply.

Nate is a great guy, and knows his stuff on AR's, loading for them, and pointing them. He's generally got some good advice to offer because he's been there and done that when it comes to accurate AR's.

All that being said, the 77 Sierra is a great bullet, and so is the 69 smk. If you can't make either one of those bullets shoot, I'd be taking a look at the rifle. I'd be surprised if the cheapest of the cheap 1:8 or 1:7 twist barrels couldn't do 1 moa with either.

I know JP makes good stuff, but I have to disagree with his assessment of a 14.5" stabilizing a 77. If a 1:7 20" service rifle can stabilize 80s, 88 elds and 90 vlds, I have full confidence that you're getting all the stability you need for a 77 in a 1:7 14.5". I wouldn't think twice about a 14.5" 1:8 for that matter.

Well, my choice of a 14.5" bbl was a deliberate choice as this is intended for mobility, knowing extreme accuracy could well suffer. Loading for accuracy includes annealing, volume testing, case sorting, etc etc and I'm not doing any of that for this gun. Pretty much no one anywhere chooses a 14./5" bbl for LR accuracy.

But like I said... I took JP to be saying "It may / may not stabilize.... U gotta try it" which I find 100% credible / in agreement with my 20+ years of shooting / reloading / reading / research. Translation as to what the tech meant: "there a 5% chance it won't stabilize. I'm gonna mention that to this stranger who called in so if it doesn't, I can remind him I told him that was a possibility."

Like you said.... JP makes good stuff. In reality, they make some of the very best AR's in the world. I find it rather unseemly ppl here are dogging them. e.g. "they are just techs, etc" THOSE TECHS are the ones actually building the rifles.

Bottom line? For this first round of testing the 69s, they stabilized in my 14.5 and in the some 40 separate 5-round test groups, the 77's did NOT. (JP was kinda proven right, and those disagreeing with them proven wrong.) Far as my gun... that's the end of the discussion. (I'm not here to make claims about what I think should happen in everyone's 14.5" AR ) For me / my gun, what actually happenned by far outweighs whatever anyone thinks SHOULD happen. The real world always trumps the theoretical. And any disagreement with / arguing against that is foolish.