Results 1 to 17 of 17

Thread: RL17 load for Barnes 225gn .338WM TSX???

  1. #1
    New member
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    8

    Default RL17 load for Barnes 225gn .338WM TSX???

    I was at the range today trying out some Barnes 225gn 338WM TSX loads with the OCW test.

    My sighters were 61.6, 62.8, & 64.1. My load graduation were 65.4, 65.8, 66.3, 66.8, and 67.2.

    I shot all my sighters and only 1 round of ea., and here's the picture of the target.



    As you can see only my 65.4 and 66.3 made it to the target. At first I thought I was just flinching really bad so I try using some Remington 225gn core lokts. I was aiming at 6 and all 3 rounds made it on paper.

    I'm wondering if anyone can give me some pointers.

    Thanks!

  2. #2
    New member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Eagle River
    Posts
    2,022

    Default

    The pic is not visible. Secondly, my .338WM REALLY likes RL22 in my handloads for a 225 grain bullet, may want to give that a try. Thirdly, be sure your scope mounts and rings are secure. Lastly, if those are completely new loads since he last sighting the POI could, and likely is much different than the last load fired and sighted through that scope, what was the range on your target?

    Check the scope/et al', place the target at 25 yards for intial sight-in, shoot a group of 3 rounds then try the next load/group of three.

  3. #3
    Moderator stid2677's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Fairbanks Area
    Posts
    7,272

    Default

    The system you are using seems to be a little more complex than the ladder method I use. Might want to try that.

    Start with the minimum load and work up to max. You will see accuracy nodes form at different velocities. Once you find the accuracy and velocity you are looking for solve for seating. All shots are fired at the same POA and the barrel is allowed to cool between shots. When ever possible I walk down and mark each shot, this keeps shots from getting mixed up and allows the barrel to cool.



    In this example you see can shots 3, 5, 7 and 8 form an accuracy node, so in this case I would load groups of 4 each of 5, 7, and 8 and then go fire for groups.

    Once I have the best group, I then solve for seating. Again different seating depths will have accuracy nodes as well. Many bullets are most accurate when seated at or near the lands, this is not always possible.

    So, I measure the distance to the lands for my bullet/rifle combo and seat my first 5 to this COAL, then I load .040, .080 and .0120 I then go and shoot these. One group should stand out.

    In this photo, you can see one group strung horizontal and another vertical then the last group hit the sweet spot.



    Hope this helps and good luck. Always be safe and start low and work up, no shortcuts when hand loading.

    Steve
    "I refuse to let the things I can't do stop me from doing the things I can"
    Founding Member
    http://www.residenthuntersofalaska.org/

  4. #4
    Member mekaniks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Seward
    Posts
    206

    Default

    Have you tried R-19 or IMR 4831? I am currently loading the same TSX bullets in my .338 using 4831 and it works well. And have used r-19 in the past with good results behind Speer .225 grand slams.

  5. #5
    Sponsor ADfields's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Missing Palmer AK in Phonix AZ.
    Posts
    6,416

    Default

    His powder choice of RL-17 is a good one in 338wm, as good as 19 or 22 in my experience. Just depends on what the particular rifle likes but if they like 19 I find usually they print a little better with 17, especially in the top loadings . . . 17 seems to have a real mellow and consistent pressure curve up there.
    Andy
    On the web= C-lazy-F.co
    Email= Andy@C-lazy-F.co
    Call/Text 602-315-2406
    Phoenix Arizona

  6. #6
    New member
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    8

    Default

    Oops, didn't realized the photo didn't work. Here it is.

    I'm pretty new to reloading and it's been hard to find any components, especially powder. I pretty much just buy whatever that's available. That said I just got 8# of IMR 4831 so I might give that a try sometime.
    Last edited by vincentmoy; 10-27-2013 at 18:38. Reason: Additional Information

  7. #7

    Default

    RL-17 is a little fast for .338. My .338 LOVES RL-22.

    RL-17 is a great 30-06 powder.

  8. #8
    Sponsor ADfields's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Missing Palmer AK in Phonix AZ.
    Posts
    6,416

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by corbanzo View Post
    RL-17 is a little fast for .338. My .338 LOVES RL-22.

    RL-17 is a great 30-06 powder.
    It is fast on the charts yes but its dual base and hits more like between 19 and 22 in real life. 17 is a very good 338wm powder and flat out great WSM/RCM powder.
    Andy
    On the web= C-lazy-F.co
    Email= Andy@C-lazy-F.co
    Call/Text 602-315-2406
    Phoenix Arizona

  9. #9
    Member dkwarthog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Mat-Su
    Posts
    2,150

    Default

    That's good to know, ADF, thanks. I have some RL17 but I'd been sticking with RL19 for the 338. I'll give it a try over the chrony when I get a chance.

    vincent, that's crazy how those reloads are off the paper like that. Something hairy going on for sure. Did you change the magnification of your scope before firing the corelokts? Otherwise, I'd have to say there's something inconsistent in your reloads.???

    Id forgo the OCW testing for now, and just load a bunch at the same charge weight and see if they'll group on paper, After checking my scope mounts etc....

  10. #10
    New member
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dkwarthog View Post
    That's good to know, ADF, thanks. I have some RL17 but I'd been sticking with RL19 for the 338. I'll give it a try over the chrony when I get a chance.

    vincent, that's crazy how those reloads are off the paper like that. Something hairy going on for sure. Did you change the magnification of your scope before firing the corelokts? Otherwise, I'd have to say there's something inconsistent in your reloads.???

    Id forgo the OCW testing for now, and just load a bunch at the same charge weight and see if they'll group on paper, After checking my scope mounts etc....
    No I have not change the magnification. It stays at 9x when I do all the shooting. I also experienced a few hard bolt lift when ejecting. However my friend who has a lot more experience than I do said he can't see any flat primer or other case deficiency so he said it's probably some soft cases.

  11. #11
    New member
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    8

    Default

    Here is a ladder test from couple days ago. The target was set at 200 yd.



    It seems like anything over 65 gn of powder will move the POI at least 2 - 3" above and to the left. But if I read this correctly it's also the best window for some more load development between 65.0 - 66.0.

    Here's the FPS for different gn.
    60.5 - 2299
    61.0 - 2273
    61.5 - 2415
    62.0 - 2425
    62.5 - 2493
    63.0 - 2492
    63.5 - 2501
    64.0 - 2536
    64.5 - 2573
    65.0 - 2608
    65.5 - 2620
    66.0 - 2666

  12. #12
    Sponsor ADfields's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Missing Palmer AK in Phonix AZ.
    Posts
    6,416

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by vincentmoy View Post
    It seems like anything over 65 gn of powder will move the POI at least 2 - 3" above and to the left. But if I read this correctly it's also the best window for some more load development between 65.0 - 66.0.

    Here's the FPS for different gn.
    60.5 - 2299
    61.0 - 2273
    61.5 - 2415
    62.0 - 2425
    62.5 - 2493
    63.0 - 2492
    63.5 - 2501
    64.0 - 2536
    64.5 - 2573
    65.0 - 2608
    65.5 - 2620
    66.0 - 2666
    That seems to be the nature of RL-17. Get into the top 1/3 or so charges and it gets real consistent. I seldom bother with the bottom half of RL-17 data anymore, I know it comes alive up top so if I want lower velocities I switch powders.
    Andy
    On the web= C-lazy-F.co
    Email= Andy@C-lazy-F.co
    Call/Text 602-315-2406
    Phoenix Arizona

  13. #13
    Member dkwarthog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Mat-Su
    Posts
    2,150

    Default

    In my reading of doing the OCW testing, I was under the impression that you wanted to test using smaller powder increments. Like .2 grains or so, to identify accuracy nodes, since 1/2 grain of powder can sometimes be enough to have wide variations. It looks like Stid uses .5 grain increments also.

    Any input on the best increment to use? ( especially considering that I really dont have alot of interest in putting together loads that are on the bottom half of the velocity range, ie low charge weights...)

  14. #14
    New member
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dkwarthog View Post
    In my reading of doing the OCW testing, I was under the impression that you wanted to test using smaller powder increments. Like .2 grains or so, to identify accuracy nodes, since 1/2 grain of powder can sometimes be enough to have wide variations. It looks like Stid uses .5 grain increments also.

    Any input on the best increment to use? ( especially considering that I really dont have alot of interest in putting together loads that are on the bottom half of the velocity range, ie low charge weights...)
    Hey sorry I probably wasn't specific enough in the post. On the 2nd test I was using the ladder test, and I believe so was Stid. The reason was when I used the OCW test, I couldn't even get it to hit the paper. The ladder test might have explain why because with the grain I loaded for my OCW test (~65 grain plus), the POI hit rather consistently 2 - 3" above and left of target. I'm thinking about rezero the scope and try to use the OCW test again.

  15. #15
    Sponsor ADfields's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Missing Palmer AK in Phonix AZ.
    Posts
    6,416

    Default

    Thats the way I do it also, this is faze 1 to identify the rough zones to concentrate on for further development. I dont like to shoot the first at 200 though, you get more wind input at 200 confusing things a tad more. Also I give more importance to elevation than windage, to me 3 shots lined up horizontal is a better accuracy node than 3 stacked up vertical because of wind effect.
     
    So reading that target I kind of see the nodes stack up vertically, only one good one though.
    ;
    60, 61, 62 looks good till you see 61.6, 62.5 are way out high.
    So low charges are a bit iritic, Id not bother with anything there.

    63, 63.5, 64 could be worth exploring, not bad but 64 is climbing out to the next node.
     
    64.5, 65, 65.5, and 66 . . . 4 shots close to the same vertical plain. Yes they are strung horizontally but some of that is wind effect, wind changes all the time. So next I would load 5 rounds at each of these charges (20 rounds) and shoot them for groups.
    One of those groups will be a stand out, likely about 1moa. Next, if Im not happy Id play with seating depth with that powder charge and shoot some more groups.


    No need to change the scope yet as long as your on paper. Just load development, aim same place every time and measure groups wherever they fall. When you have your load then spend the rounds to bring POI and POA together.
    Andy
    On the web= C-lazy-F.co
    Email= Andy@C-lazy-F.co
    Call/Text 602-315-2406
    Phoenix Arizona

  16. #16
    New member
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ADfields View Post
    Thats the way I do it also, this is faze 1 to identify the rough zones to concentrate on for further development. I dont like to shoot the first at 200 though, you get more wind input at 200 confusing things a tad more. Also I give more importance to elevation than windage, to me 3 shots lined up horizontal is a better accuracy node than 3 stacked up vertical because of wind effect.
     
    So reading that target I kind of see the nodes stack up vertically, only one good one though.
    ;
    60, 61, 62 looks good till you see 61.6, 62.5 are way out high.
    So low charges are a bit iritic, Id not bother with anything there.

    63, 63.5, 64 could be worth exploring, not bad but 64 is climbing out to the next node.
     
    64.5, 65, 65.5, and 66 . . . 4 shots close to the same vertical plain. Yes they are strung horizontally but some of that is wind effect, wind changes all the time. So next I would load 5 rounds at each of these charges (20 rounds) and shoot them for groups.
    One of those groups will be a stand out, likely about 1moa. Next, if Im not happy Id play with seating depth with that powder charge and shoot some more groups.


    No need to change the scope yet as long as your on paper. Just load development, aim same place every time and measure groups wherever they fall. When you have your load then spend the rounds to bring POI and POA together.
    At what distance do you do your ladder test at? I read quite a few post and people seems to do that at 300+ yd.

  17. #17
    Sponsor ADfields's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Missing Palmer AK in Phonix AZ.
    Posts
    6,416

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by vincentmoy View Post
    At what distance do you do your ladder test at? I read quite a few post and people seems to do that at 300+ yd.
    I start as far out as I know I can be on paper but not past 100 yards at first. The more you go out the more effect environmental factors have and the controllable factors dont change closer in. In other words at 50 yards will be 1 at 100 and 2 at 200 but for the environmental factors so why not reduce them by shooting closer.
     
    Down the line further more distance may help by increasing the group size, much easer to measure 2 at 200 than at 50 accurately. And eventually I want to chart what the real world lode does all the way out to max range, usually take a 200 yard zero on the scope then too. Just I see more negatives to shooting past 100 in load development than positives. A big negative here is I have a lot longer trip to shoot over 100, I can shoot 50 in my yard, 100 couple spots within 5 miles but over 100 is a much bigger trip for me.
    Andy
    On the web= C-lazy-F.co
    Email= Andy@C-lazy-F.co
    Call/Text 602-315-2406
    Phoenix Arizona

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •