Go | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply |
one of us |
Here are my velocities from my 20.1 inch barrelled FN-FAL. Remington once-fired cases, 150 grain Sierra HPBT, IMR-4064 and CCI-250 primer. Gas setting 4.5. 43 grains: 2703, 2696, 2719 Ave. 2706 Remington Factory 150 grain Corelokt: What gives? I don't get this. Either Remington is severly | ||
|
one of us |
Remington shows those bullets at 2820 fps. If that is a new box of ammo I would have no idea, except bad quality control. Your load looks fine. Good Luck, ------------------ | |||
|
one of us |
I sure Remington rates their velocity for this loading from at least a 24" pressure barrel and more likely a 26" barrel and your post says your barrel length is only 20". I would expect 20 to 30 fps loss in velocity for each inch of barrel shorter than the Rem test barrel. As an aside, I can't remember the last time I got the velocity for any cartridge that was shown on the box and I use a dual-channel Oehler chronograph. | |||
|
one of us |
Besides barrel length, who knows? I've chronographed a variety of factory ammo in a few different rifles and rarely come close to factory advertised velocities even with the same barrel length. On one end of the spectrum in .30-06 we have Federal Premium 180-gr. Nosler Partition which was 250 fps under listings. Federal High Energy with the same bullet was right around factory listings but gave pressure signs in both my rifles! The flip side was the .270 Federal Classic 150 RNSP which exceeded advertised velocities despite only a 22" barrel. Anyone ever try writing to the manufacturers about this? John | |||
|
one of us |
So, you've discovered the dirty little secret: American factory-loaded centerfire ammunition is in desperate need of Viagra. 99% of shooters have no access to chronographs, and have no idea what kind of performance their ammunition is turning in. Underloading ammunition is (1) cheaper and (2) a bit safer for the ammo companies. And since nobody but people like us know the difference, and knowing the difference just makes us reload more and consume more components, underperforming factory loads are a win-win for the factories. It also creates a market for "high-enegy" and "super-premium" loadings at inflated prices, which in reality, just about reach factory-claimed velocities for the regular loads. Ain't it a wonderful country! | |||
|
one of us |
I've never actually done this myself, but I'd like to see the results of taking 3 or 4 or 5 identical rifles -- let's say Remington 700s in 30/06 -- and firing them one after another with exactly the same loads under exactly the same conditions and chronographing the results. I'd be willing to bet that the velocities would differ by at least as much as 100 f.p.s., and probably as much as 150 f.p.s. My point? Every rifle is unique, even if they're from the same manufacturer or gunsmith. This applies to accuracy and velocity, as well as other aspects of the rifle. So what you read from any published ballistic source applies to the particular gun and test, but YMMV. | |||
|
<Mike M> |
LE270 You are correct. I have never done it with 3 or 4 rifles but have tried 2 identical factory Sako 223s and 2 custom 7 x 57s with the same barrel length. Depending on the load, velocities varied between 100 to 200 fps from rifle to rifle. I have also seen velocities vary as much as 8 % just by changing lots of the same type powder. | ||
Powered by Social Strata |
Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia