Actually I have with my 338 wm and 225 gr Nosler Partitions and H4350 I am gettting 2950 fps with no pressure signs. I did reach over 3016 fps, but got a sticky bolt. Load was accurate in my M70 w/ BOSS as well.
Posts: 179 | Location: Wisconsin | Registered: 02 October 2001
In my guns, Nosler is generally a little closer to real-world performance figures than the others. But every firearm is a rule unto itself, and you can buy 2 identical rifles in the same caliber, feed 'em the same load and get 100 fps variance in velocity along with accuracy preferences for different loads as well.
Posts: 9438 | Location: Shiner TX USA | Registered: 19 March 2002
BARNES IS WORSE THAN NOSLER!! Barnes loads are max but you'll not get within 200 fps of alot of loads. IE--I think you're supposed to break 3000 fps with a 165 barnes in a 30-06. Yah right! I think they have a 30" test barrel with super tight chamber!! However--I use the barnes manual alot as a "tie breaker" when planning loads. If they say a max load is ok with their all copper bullets it's probably very good with normal bullets.
Posts: 2002 | Location: central wi | Registered: 13 September 2002
If you notice, Nosler uses a min spec`ed test barrel on a universal receiver to get those velocities. You`ll have a rough time reaching them with your 22" Remchester. I find Speer comes the closest to my reloads velocities.
Posts: 2535 | Location: Michigan | Registered: 20 January 2001
I don't want to dispute your findings, but let me make some suggestions when comparing your chro data to published data by Nosler or anyone else. First of all, always consider barrel length. Check the barrel length in published data against your rifle's. Obviously, the shorter barrel will/should deliver somewhat lower velocity. Now let's get to the less obvious parts: That being that the published data, by whomever, will show actual MUZZLE velocity. Your chrony, or whatever, does NOT. You must make corrections for the distance between muzzle and your chro screens. It can be considerable, even when the distance is only a few feet because that is the area of max velocity loss. Next, and least understood of all, is that firing a rifle fron your shoulder will always record LESS velocity than from the same rifle in a static (non-recoiling) rest. Add these factors together and it is not at all unusual for the differences between your readings and published data to be in excess of 100,and more, FPS. That's why the firearms and ammo makers retain independent consultants such as the company I work for to confirm their loads and data. Hope this helps explain. Rusty
I have w/ my .338-06, got close w/ the .280. I'll have to check the new manual & see if they have data on the 7mm Dakota. I think the manual is close if you factor in bbl. lengths.
Posts: 7752 | Location: kalif.,usa | Registered: 08 March 2001
I have always been impressed with how real world the Nosler Manuals seem to be. I have experience with the .224 40gr Ballistic Tip in a 22BR, the 55gr 6MM Ballistic Tip in a .243 and the 130gr. Ballistic Tip in a .270. All maximum speeds listed by Nosler were very close to what I achieved.
Posts: 8 | Location: Ste. 1020, 1819 Fifth Ave. North | Registered: 25 July 2002
I've just been doing some experiments in my 221, 223 and 243 looking for max loads (without regard to accuracy or usefulness). The Nostler BTs were always slower than the equivalent Hornady Vmax, at the same charge. In the 223 a charge that gave 3660 with the Vmax resulted in 3450 with the Nosler. Similar in the 243 where the 70 Nosler was way slower than the 75 Vmax at the same charge. I measured the diameters, and found that the Vmax were all exactly on the advertised size, whereas the Noslers were all slightly undersize.
Posts: 121 | Location: Southern Australia | Registered: 13 December 2000
I some cases my velocities are lower but in some they area ctually higher than the nosler values.There are too many variables in barrels and components to expect your velocities to match any manual.
Posts: 3104 | Location: alberta,canada | Registered: 28 January 2002
quote:Originally posted by stubblejumper: There are too many variables in barrels and components to expect your velocities to match any manual.
Stubble - You win the prize. Not only is every gun a "personality" unto itself, but so is every load. I always consider published data in loading magazines little more than ball park figures.
The first 20 years of my shooting career I drove myself crazy with the techno-babble of shooting. Velocities, trajectories, wind drift, chorograph results. You name it. I read it.
One day I realized all this really didn't amount to a hoot in hell. Work up a good strong load that shoots good in your rifle and shoot it. Get to know it. Piss on what the chart says your trajectory is. Go out in the field and LEARN what your rifle's trajectory is. Get to know your hi power rifle just like you got to know your .22 Long Rifle when you were a kid. Most of us learned to shoot .22s long before we could ever spell trajectory. Wind drift was by feel/instinct and most of us got pretty good if we shot much.
This principle applies to any rifle. You can study it forwards and backwards and be able to quote every figure in the book about it...and it don't mean nothing.
The only thing that counts is the connection between you and your rifle when you pick it up. And when that buck bolts from cover and races towards the rim above, none us are going to be thinking a bunch of bullshit numbers and angles and dangles. We throw the rifle up and know instinctively (thanks to a lot of practice with the gun) how to make the shot...or else the deer goes over the mountain and probably into the sights of some guy with a 30/30 that hasn't a clue what a chronograph is. All he knows is how his 30/30 shoots. And that's enough.
I'm not anti-technology. I'm just practical.
[ 11-13-2002, 09:05: Message edited by: Pecos45 ]
Posts: 19677 | Location: New Mexico | Registered: 23 May 2002
quote:Originally posted by RustyRifling: I don't want to dispute your findings, but let me make some suggestions when comparing your chro data to published data by Nosler or anyone else. First of all, always consider barrel length. Check the barrel length in published data against your rifle's. Obviously, the shorter barrel will/should deliver somewhat lower velocity. Now let's get to the less obvious parts: That being that the published data, by whomever, will show actual MUZZLE velocity. Your chrony, or whatever, does NOT. You must make corrections for the distance between muzzle and your chro screens. It can be considerable, even when the distance is only a few feet because that is the area of max velocity loss. Next, and least understood of all, is that firing a rifle fron your shoulder will always record LESS velocity than from the same rifle in a static (non-recoiling) rest. Add these factors together and it is not at all unusual for the differences between your readings and published data to be in excess of 100,and more, FPS. That's why the firearms and ammo makers retain independent consultants such as the company I work for to confirm their loads and data. Hope this helps explain. Rusty
Same length barrel, same make barrel in one case, same brass, different primer, different powder lot. Velocity adjusted by JBM ballistics from chrono distance to muzzle.
Three rifles is starting to get significant in my eyes.
The opposite is the VV manual where charges are stiff but velocities very pessimistic indeed.
[ 11-13-2002, 15:30: Message edited by: 1894 ]
Posts: 2258 | Location: Bristol, England | Registered: 24 April 2001
![[Smile]](images/icons/smile.gif){kind=icon}
![[Big Grin]](images/icons/grin.gif){kind=icon}
