Okay, got that, how do you measure that?
Printable View
With the barrel off, this one is exactly .125".
https://i.ibb.co/4Zfvv5h/chamberdepth.jpg
Actually, that is related to what I was talking about but the conversation was measuring FP protrusion. I may be mistaken but how I do it is measure from the end of the bolt head(1st face) to the face(2nd) at the bottom of the counter bore of the bolt head. Next you measure from face 1, to the tip of the firing pin. Subtract that number from the first dimension gives you your protrusion. The first number is usually very close to .115". //////// Now to correlate that to what Dave brought to light, case protrusion. This is not related to any issue I believe you currently have but for edification and to show the reason for all bolt heads being manufactured to a closely held tolerance, as are Prefit Barrels for Savages. Obviously if your case protrudes your breach too much it will come out bast the web and things would get exciting. If your case protrudes less than the depth of the bolt head face then the face of the bolt will end up rubbing/galling the breach of the barrel before you set headspace.
Neck sizing went out of style twenty years ago, now will use full length bushing type sizing dies and experiment with different bushing to get the neck tension/ bullet hold the rifle likes. Annealing softens/weakens brass and removes the carbon from the neck ID that once burnished becomes an excellent lube for seating bullets. If your set up likes really light neck tension then you’ll likely see good results from annealing however the opposite is also true and we long range guys have been known to use bushing .005 under a loaded round letting the target tell the truth. Working hardened strong brass is not a bad thing and personally have never split a case neck. If a guy has erratic groups and can’t get them to settle down, ask him if he’s annealing and trying to run light bullet hold/ NT and I’ll bet he says -yeah
I do use full length die (Forster) for my 6BR. Seems to work well. I guess I could mess with the expander ball to see where the sweet spot is but it shoots better than I can hold it now so not sure I would see any difference.
I still neck size only (Lee collet) for my .308 cast bullet loads. They seem to do better that way. Mostly lower pressure loads.
I have never annealed a case. Not saying you shouldn't do it, but, I have never felt the need. I've only split a few case necks....after more than 20 reloads on the cases. I also rarely deep clean my brass.
I did some further refinement work on H4350 loads today and got some good groups at near max loads of 41.2 and 41.4 gr. They weren't sub 1/2 MOA, but 3/4 and 5/8" are pretty good. Loads below 41.2 don't group well at all. The velocity, with my 22" barrel, is pretty low. The 41.2 load shoots just either side of 2600 fps and 41.4 gives me about 2630 fps. I think I'm going to try these loads with CCI 450 magnum primers and see if there's any difference. I have been unable to find H4350 in 8 lb containers so this may just be an exercise in futility like the previous loads I worked up in RL-16 and Staball 6.5.
Well, that’s realistic velocity. Even with a 26” they are only tipping 2700-2750 or so zone.….regardless of the droves of guys online stating 2900+++ with the CM, LOL! No, your velocity is decent given the 22”. Although, it completely explains why the groups go to hell below that 41.2gr powder charge. You are right at the velocity threshold which the heavier pills like.
Ernest T
I have three 6.5 CMs all Savages, two with 26-inch barrels and one with a 24-inch barrel.
All three shoot accurately, but the 26-inch barrels shoot most accurately with bullets 140 grs and above.
The 24-inch barrel shoots most accurately with 130 grain bullets (Sierra TMKs and ELD-Ms).
I don't think that barrel length is the reason, because I have two Savage 308s, both with 24-inch barrels, and they show different bullet and powder preferences. One likes heavier bullets (175 gr) and the other likes lighter bullets (155 gr).
Each barrel will tell you what it shoots best.
IMHO, the wear on the barrel reamer or a lot of steel being used have more to do with bullet performance than barrel length.
Barrel length will determine velocity because of the time the bullet is being accelerated in the barrel, but I don't think it effects bullet or powder preferences.
There is the possibility the bullets will make a difference, and maybe not. :) Keep in mind that some of the ELD bullets might be more sensitive to distance from the lands. SMK's are known for tolerating large jump to the lands than some others. The Berger 155's in my .308 weren't really 'happy' unless they were touching or slightly jammed into the lands.
I have found that most powders give a lower ES/SD at higher density loads.
I ordered Hornady 120 and 130 grain ELD-Match bullets just to see how they'd shoot in my gun. However, I am puzzled by the Hornady reloading manual entries for these bullets. Since I just bought 8 lbs of Superperformance powder, I was looking for loads using that powder and 120 130 and 140 grain bullets. The books lists loads for 140 and 120 grain bullets, but not 130 grain for Superformance. Is that because they just didn't work up a load for that bullet or, however unlikely, is there is possibly an issue using that weight bullet with Superperformance? I'm thinking its the former and that I could work up a load using the data for the 120 and 140 grain bullets to determine a starting point.
In the meantime, I've ordered a pound of Winchester 760 powder which is listed for the 130 and 140 grain bullets, but not the 120. I can understand that since it might not be suitable for the lower weight bullet. I don't understand being suitable for lighter and heavier bullets, but not the one in the middle between them. It'd be nice if there was a powder I could use for all three just for comparison.
Never been able to figure out how the mfgs decide on which loads to list.
I would just extrapolate.
This is what I came up with. The differences between the first four loads for the 140 grain bullet are much larger than the differences between the other three loads for the 140 grain bullet. The differences between the loads for the 120 grain bullets are much smaller and more consistent. The large differences between the first four loads for the 140 grain bullet throws off the first four extrapolated loads for the 130 grain bullet.
2400 2500 2600 2650 2700 2750 2800 2850 2900 2950 3000 140 38.2 39.8 41.4 42.2 43.1 43.9 44.7 130 41.2 42.4 43.5 44.3 45.1 45.9 46.6 120 44.2 44.9 45.6 46.4 47.1 47.8 48.5
I'm wondering if I shouldn't just start loads for the 130 grain bullet at the 46.6 max and back off each load .8 toward the minimum load. That results in a .8 grain higher load for the minimum, but it splits the difference between the starting loads for the 120 and 130 grain bullets.
2400 2500 2600 2650 2700 2750 2800 2850 2900 2950 3000 130 42.0 42.8 43.6 44.2 45.0 45.8 46.6
I arrived at the numbers by averaging the 140 and 120 grain loads. The first 130 grain load is the average of the first loads of 39.8 and 44.2.
Well, doing some more searching and I found Superperformance loads for a Hornady 130 gr. CX bullet. It has a coefficient of .489 which is close to the 130 gr. ELD-M ballistic coefficient of .656. The good news is I wasn't far off at the high end with my estimates.
2600 2700 2750 2800 2850 2900 2950 130 gr. Hornady CX 39.6 gr. 41.6 gr. 42.7 gr. 43.7 gr. 44.7 gr. 45.7 gr. 46.8 gr
You do know you could use that load data for your 130ELD-M. For any case you need to start a little lower and work up. If I know I want to be near max then I'll start a grain or two lower and run a series in 0.2gn increments.
I can't remember which thread it was in, but somewhere I mentioned that I used nutserts to hold down my press and other accessories on my bench top, and someone, I believe it was either Dave or Charlie, recommended I use T track. I decided to take that advice and put a new top on my bench with two rows of T-track across the width.
I used 3/4" melamine sheet to make the top and used walnut to trim the edge. That tall box with the scale on it is made for raising my dovetail jig to a comfortable height above the bench top. I found its the exact height, when placed on end, to raise the scale to eye level. Its a lot better than bending down to view the pointer.
Attachment 9094
Attachment 9095
Closeup of the T-track. I didn't want to use the melamine square under the press, but I'd have had to put the T track right on the edge of the bench top for the handle to clear it when depressed.
Attachment 9096
Wasn’t me who recommended…, but I like it. Great job!
Wow!
I wish my bench looked that clean and uncluttered.
Very nice work.
You do nice work!
I may have posted about using T-track on my bench but not for the press. Priming, trimming, powder measure stand, etc. are all set up for t-track so I have a clean bench when they're not in use.
Thanks! Woodworking is my main hobby. Here's a look at the inside of my tool cabinet -- this is the top half..
Attachment 9112
Now that's beautiful!! I love my woodworking hand tools, but, I am not that good with them, or patient :) Had to give up quite a few of them in a move years ago. Have just the minimum left.
The track wasn't my idea either. I use Tnuts under the benchtop. I used thread inserts before and the force on the press pulled them out. But, with your extended frame mount for the press that is not going to happen. Leverage favors that kind of setup.
Your loading bench looks great too.
Thanks Charlie. For a lot of years, except for dimensioning, I used hand tools almost exclusively, I hand-cut dovetails and mortise and tenon joints and used hand planes for dados and rabbets. I have gone back to using machines for most of those operations since I retired as I don't have the patience or eyesight to do that type of work any more. Most of my hand tools are antiques I've collected over the years and I'm in the process of donating most of them to the local museum. I'll keep the few that have a place in a machine woodworking shop.
Cool.
I don't do a lot. These days it is really simple stuff or 'therapy' work :)
Gorgeous woodwork!!! My son has more of a flair for that than me. Autobody metal work was my thing but when it comes woodwork I just make sawdust. :-)
Hello,
New to posting on the forum. I reload for 6.5 CM for long range target (bullseye). I have found my rifle likes H4350 the best, getting 2825 with 41.2 gr. I have a 30" barrel that helps velocity. I have tried R-16 which gave me a little better velocity but was not as accurate. The H4350 load is in comfortable pressure range. No signs of high pressure.
I didn't read every page of this thread, just the first 5 then the end so I may have missed someone post that they use Starline brass. I got mine just before covid lockdown so I decided to turn the necks taking very slight amount off high side. What the heck, I was locked down and not much else to do. The brass has performed well for me. Reloaded 5 times, annealed after four reloads. Gave me the best sd compared to everything else that I shoot. It loves the ELD-Match 140's. Will not tolerate Sierra 142 gr bullets, trying several times and finally gave up.
BTY Earnest T, nice bench set up. Mine does not look as well kept. Thanks
Well, in my seemingly never ending quest to find a load my gun likes, in a powder I can actually find in quantity, I've spent the morning loading Lapua SRP brass with CCI 450 Magnum SRP primers and H4350. I got pretty good results with 41.4 gr of H4350 powder and CCI 400 SRPs so I'm repeating the 40.8, 41.0, 41.2 and 41.4 gr loads. I didn't see any reason to start with the lowest loads since the groups were so bad.
Ernest T,
My 26-in barrel 12 FV 6.5mm CM with an Oryx chassis shoots H4350 bests of all powders.
With H4350, Hornady 147 ELD-M # 26333 and Nosler 140 gr RDF UHBC #49824 both average 0.307 for all the groups shot.
Best loads with 147 gr ELD-Ms were 0.234 @ 2666 fps, 0.243 @ 2661 fps, 0.259 @ 2666 fps, and 0.269 @ 2666 fps.
Best loads with the 140 gr Nosler RDF UHBCs were 0.281 @ 2688 fps and 0.297 @ 2687 fps, respectively.
With all weight bullets including 130 gr, 140 gr, 142 gr, 143 gr and 147 gr, H4350 has averaged 0.324 for 287 groups.
Next best powders are H4831 SC that averaged 0.351 for 19 groups, and IMR4451 that averaged 0.352 for 195 groups.
IMR4350 averaged 0.362 for 69 groups and RL-17 averaged 0.401 for 13 groups.
Of the top 10 loads for that rifle, 8 are with H4350 powder and 2 are with IMR 4451
Of the top 25 loads, 17 are with H4350 powder.
Not saying that all 6.5mm rifles will like H4350 powder best, but that it is worth a try.
Note the velocities are all pretty close but that is because I get the best results using the velocity that gets the exit time that minimizes barrel harmonics.
I have not tried the 147 ELDs in the 6.5 CM. The ballistics advantage would make it worthwhile to experiment with. Also, I have not tried H4831sc in it. That powder worked better than H4350 in another rifle I play with a 6.5 x 55 Imp.
I’ve got 120 and 130 gr ELD match bullets I’m going to give a try too. It looks like the 120s might benefit from a barrel with 10 twists instead of 8? Im enjoying learning a whole bunch of new things about ballistics and reloading.
I am working on loads for 130 grain Hornady ELD-M bullets and have the same issue with them as I had with the 140 grain bullets. They are too long for the magazine when seated close to the lands. This is .020 off the lands. Oh so close! This is where I started and worked back toward the lengths I'm using for the 140 ELD-Ms. It looks like I can remove a little material from the magazine and the round will load. Is there a reason not to do that?
Attachment 9149
You could, but have you tried seating them a bit deeper? The 155ELDM bullets I used in the .308 had a jump of something like .060 and they were still well under MOA. They were the fist sub-MOA group I fired at 1000yd.
Ern, pull the mag apart and a rod rolled in some 220grit sandpaper in the front of that mag. You can easily pick up that bit of extra room you need for that COAL.;)
I had the same problem with plastic AICS mags in my 6.5mm when I loaded close to minimal jump.
It will get worse if you try 147 grain ELS-M or 143 grain ELD-X bullets.
I went with an aluminum AICS magazine that doesn't have all that plastic to strengthen the mag and was able to seat to 2.895 OAL with perfect feeding from the mag.
However, my 6.5mm has lots of rounds (over 4,000) down the barrel and the throat erosion has gotten deep enough that with the 147 gr ELD-Ms, even the aluminum mag is too short to handle the OAL needed to maintain the jump I prefer for that bullet.
I now single load the really long bullets.
Of course, single loading hasn't reduced the accuracy. Actually, the recent single load groups are averaging just about 0.290 with the 0.147s, so that works for target shooting from a bench.
Seating the rounds with an OAL short enough to fit the mag doesn't hurt the accuracy much, less than .020 increase in average, but I'm addicted to getting the most accuracy out of my loads.
LOL!
I ran some test loads with H4350 and CCI 450 Magnum SRP with 140 gr. ELD-M bullets. The magnum primers didn't seem to affect velocity that much, but the ES and SD were much better as were the groups. Its interesting that the velocity for the 41.4 loads takes a jump with both primers.
These were five shot groups
40.8 41 41.2 41.4 6-Feb 2600 2593 2608 2689 2591 2591 2589 2704 2594 2578 2616 2665 2615 2609 2576 2697 2579 2605 2587 2693 2595.8 2595.2 2595.2 2689.6 6-Jan 2586 2600 2592 2678 2596 2600 2604 2639 2598 2585 2591 2634 2590 2601 2595 2621 2594 2598 2605 2638 2592.8 2596.8 2597.4 2642.00
6-Feb
40.8 gr. ES 12, SD 4
41.0 gr. ES 16, SD 6
41.2 gr. ES 14, SD 6
41.4 gr. ES 18, SD 7
6-Jan
40.8 gr. ES 36, SD 12
41.0 gr. ES 31, SD 11
41.2 gr. ES 40, SD 15
41.4 gr. ES 39, SD 13
It wasn't exactly prime shooting weather this morning, but its going to be worse the rest of the week so you take what you can get. It wasn't supposed to rain, but at least it wasn't raining hard!
Attachment 9168
Reading the posts about the inaccuracy with the 140 grain, I wonder if that could be the problem with my Axis. It is absolutely the most inaccurate rifle I ever owned but I have not shot it a lot and only with factory ammo. I want to try some reloads but don't have any large rifle primers.
I see there is brass with the small primer pocket for the 6.5 but I can't seem to find any of that either. It seems small rifle primers are a lot easier to find than the large rifle and I do have a fair supply of those. I am only able to shoot my 223s at this time due to lack of large rifle primers. This primer situation is past ridiculous, what has it been now, 3 years and still the same situation. I don't understand what is going on with the component shortages. Everything is harder to get than it used to be but primers are by far the worst.
I remember hearing a year or two ago that primer manufacturers were going to cut back on selling to the general public and due to demand were going to provide more to ammunition manufacturers. It seems now that more primers are up from $80/1000 a few years ago to $115/1000 but I have seen LR Magnum Match going for $175/1000 and they get gobbled up as soo as they are posted.
My Axis didn't like factory ammo at all, but I finally found a combination of cartridge length and powder charge that will give me sub MOA groups with 140 ELD-Ms. As to 6.5 CM SRP brass, I've found it all over, but you have to act fast as it doesn't stay around long. I saw bags of it at Bass Pro shop in Round Rock, TX while I was picking up an order. They also had SRP primers in stock.
These people have SRP 6.5 CM tonight.
https://www.grafs.com/retail/catalog...roductId/77494
https://alphamunitions.com/product/6...-rifle-primer/
I can't believe it! Brownell's has RL-15, RL-16, and RL-17 in stock!
I've been working on two parallel load development tracks, one using 140 grain ELD-M bullets, H4350 powder, and CCI 450 magnum primers. The second load is using 130 grain ELD-M bullets, Winchester 760 powder, and CCI 450 primers.
The magnum primers tightened up the 140 grain bullet groups a little at the same powder weight and seating depth that previously yielded the best results. I ended up with three sub MOA groups at 41.0, 41.2 and 41.4 grains. The 41.2 group was actually 3/8". I'm really happy with these results.
I got excellent results with the 130s, but I tried so many different powder loads and seating depths that I only used three shot groups. Still, I had 5 sub MOA groups using 43.4 grains of powder from 2.165 to 2.194 CBTO. I've got to go back and look at these to see if I get the same results with 5 shot groups.
This was the best 3 shot group.
Attachment 9182
I was thinking last night, and decided to finish testing the 140 ELDs with magnum primers and H4350, AND the 130 ELDs with Winchester 760 and magnum primers. That will just about exhaust my supply of H4350 and Winchester 760. Then, since I now have 8 lbs of RL-16 and 8 lbs of Superperformance on hand , I'm going to try different bullets with those powders. So far I've only loaded Hornady ELD match bullets.
This morning I received an email from Powder Valley offering free shipping, today only, so I ordered 500 Nosler 140 Grain HPBT Reduced Drag Factor bullets. They have a BC just slightly higher than the Hornady ELD match bullets so there shouldn't be much of a learning curve with them.