|
Post by lwh723 on Dec 28, 2014 15:47:27 GMT -5
Nice shooting josh and great looking rig. Between the weight and brake I bet the recoil is barely noticeable.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 28, 2014 17:17:13 GMT -5
Great shooting and fine rig you got there..."Earnhardt Unlimited"
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 28, 2014 21:08:07 GMT -5
Nice shooting josh and great looking rig. Between the weight and brake I bet the recoil is barely noticeable. You're actually right! The recoil is barely noticed with the heavy gun and brake. 1 month ago I was shooting the same loads out of a 15.5 lb gun with no brake and getting pounded. Now that 15.5 lb gun, and this gun have a brake, and I can shoot 50 shots without a single dizzy spell or punch drunk episode! 7mmfreak, I didn't answer part of your question before... I don't plan on changing out Savage T/A actions in the LRT stocks that I have. The other Granite Stock Savage T/A I have, has a barrel nut barrel on it (1.12" barrel shank), so the barrel channel is smaller in the granite stock in the lighter birch stock on this gun. I could easily open the granite stock up and interchange the actions I guess, but for right now I'm going to keep the actions in there respective stocks. For right now, I see no reason to bed the actions to the Whidden blocks, or bed the barrels, when the guns are shooting 1/2 MOA out to 500 yards. I could certainly try it later though.
|
|
|
Post by 7mmfreak on Dec 28, 2014 22:07:38 GMT -5
If you end up running it as a slave stock I would be interested in hearing how it goes. I have shot pillar bedded guns pretty exclusively until the past couple of years when we went to chassis guns at work and I started shooting one for matches this year too. I have never bedded a bedding-block stock/chassis and I never bed barrels even when I pillar bed. I'm still torn on whether I want to use a bedding-block for SML bullet development when I have so much faith in well bedded guns. That said, I had good luck this year with the chassis and you are showing great results your bedding block stocks. I like the idea of having one stock that fits me really well and using it for a number of barreled actions.
|
|
|
Post by 7mmfreak on Dec 29, 2014 21:24:29 GMT -5
Does the bedding block for the Savage float the tang?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 29, 2014 23:30:59 GMT -5
Does the bedding block for the Savage float the tang? Yep, the rear tang is floating in my Savage Whidden blocks.
|
|
|
Post by cowhunter on Dec 30, 2014 13:03:45 GMT -5
Those are amazing groups. Thanks for the report. Long barrels are "back on the menu boys" (quoting an Orc in TheTwo Towers). I have occasional poof shots with straight 4831, even with the .040 bushing. Maybe I need to use more powder. I know you don't like to disclose powder amounts, but are you using less 4350 than BadBull loads (130 grain minimum)? Keep up the great long-distance shooting. I'm putting those groups in my wallet!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 30, 2014 18:38:41 GMT -5
Those are amazing groups. Thanks for the report. Long barrels are "back on the menu boys" (quoting an Orc in TheTwo Towers). I have occasional poof shots with straight 4831, even with the .040 bushing. Maybe I need to use more powder. I know you don't like to disclose powder amounts, but are you using less 4350 than BadBull loads (130 grain minimum)? Keep up the great long-distance shooting. I'm putting those groups in my wallet! It's not an apples to apples comparison with 209M primers vs. LRM primers. Especially with slow burning powders. LRMs work great with fast burning powders or with booster powders. I could ignite 4198 by smacking 2 rocks together. With the same size bushing hole, barrel length and bullet weight, 209 guns will get a lot more velocity than LRMs will, out of the same amount of slow burning powders. 209M guns get faster velocities than LRM guns with fast powders also (4198), but the slower the powder the bigger the difference in how much faster 209M guns are than LRM guns. I got the same velocity with my 209M primers with a 275 grn bullet and 120 grains of 4350, as the LRM guns will get with 140 grains of powder. That's 20 grains less than the LRM gun, and I got the same velocity! 209M primers add needed pressure to a load that the slower powders need to perform efficiently. That's why some guys are seeing pressure starved loads with their LRM guns when using slow powders. The LRM primer is hot, but adds no pressure to the load. cowhunter, I'm guessing the reason your 209 gun won't ignite 4831 with a .040" bushing is that you have too much primer leakage in the primer pocket, or too much blowby around the sealing shoulder of the Savage plug. Put some Teflon tape on the plug threads, and try that. Or try one of the sealing shoulder cleaning tools that Hillbill and airborneike make. If you used a "C" drill bit to open up your primer pocket, like a lot of us have, you're screwed if that's what's causing the primer leakage. If you haven't drilled out the primer pocket, try a different brand of Magnum 209 primer. And see if it seals up better than the one you are using now. The tighter the 209 seals the better ignition will be and the faster the velocities will be. But a warning to all who want to use a booster powder with a 209 or LRM with slow burning powder. Use a "moderate" burn rate booster powder with the slow burning main powder charges. With some of the slow burn rate main powder charges, the pressures and velocities really spike with a booster powder.
|
|
|
Post by cowhunter on Dec 31, 2014 13:30:37 GMT -5
That is amazing that you use less 4350 than the Bad Bull loads. I had a hunch you did. I don't know if there is any .45 cal center fire rifle out there that gets the speed, energy and accuracy of your Bomber. These guns are sure fun to test and hunt with. I'm interested to see how the boat tail .45 bullets shoot in the Bomber.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2015 20:44:09 GMT -5
Deleted...
|
|
|
Post by ping on Jan 5, 2015 23:37:21 GMT -5
Why burn 120 grains of 4350 to get 3050 FPS when you can burn 78 grains of 4198 and get the same velocity?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2015 23:50:26 GMT -5
Why burn 120 grains of 4350 to get 3050 FPS when you can burn 87 grains of 4198 and get the same velocity? You are comparing apples to oranges there. 78grs of 4198 and a 327 is not going to produce anywhere near 3050fps but the pressure will be through the ceiling. That 78gr load can't be used safely with all bullets.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 6, 2015 8:19:52 GMT -5
Why burn 120 grains of 4350 to get 3050 FPS when you can burn 87 grains of 4198 and get the same velocity? 87 grains of 4198 and a 327 grain bullet would be 75,000 psi Please! DO NOT use 87 grains of H4198 in your gun!!!!
|
|
|
Post by rambler on Jan 6, 2015 9:47:20 GMT -5
Why burn 120 grains of 4350 to get 3050 FPS when you can burn 87 grains of 4198 and get the same velocity? 87 grains of 4198 and a 327 grain bullet would be 75,000 psi Please! DO NOT use 87 grains of H4198 in your gun!!!! I'm hoping he transposed the numbers by mistake.
|
|
|
Post by ping on Jan 6, 2015 11:14:47 GMT -5
My question was why would you burn 1/3 or so more powder to get the same velocity. I did not (but should have)state a bullet weight. So lets try this question again.
Why does Bad Bull recommends 130 grains of 4350 powder with a 275 BE and a velocity of 3050 FPS or so,,,, and Hankins recommends 78 grains of 4198 for 3000 FPS with a 275 BE..
Just wondering if the 4350 has an advantage over the 4198? and if it does not, why would someone use it at a 1/3 more cost per shot,, unless that was the only powder he could get..
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 6, 2015 11:28:56 GMT -5
My question was why would you burn 1/3 or so more powder to get the same velocity. I did not (but should have)state a bullet weight. So lets try this question again. Why does Bad Bull recommends 130 grains of 4350 powder with a 275 BE and a velocity of 3050 FPS or so,,,, and Hankins recommends 87 grains of 4198 for 3000 FPS with a 275 BE.. Just wondering if the 4350 has an advantage over the 4198? and if it does not, why would someone use it at a 1/3 more cost per shot,, unless that was the only powder he could get.. Who recommends 87 grains of 4198 for 3000 FPS with a 275BE?
|
|
|
Post by Jon on Jan 6, 2015 11:32:40 GMT -5
If I remember correctly Jeff uses 78 grains of I4198 with a 275 grain bullet?
|
|
|
Post by hankinsrfls on Jan 6, 2015 13:42:11 GMT -5
If I remember correctly Jeff uses 78 grains of I4198 with a 275 grain bullet? Jon. You are correct. I use 78 grains of IMR4198 with a 275 BE and it will generate 2950-3000 FPS in every rifle I have ever built. I have shot some bullets at 3300 FPS with that same charge, but they were 185 grain Hornady XTP's and the accuracy was about 1.5 MOA if I remember correctly...
Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by rangeball on Jan 6, 2015 13:52:58 GMT -5
Let's assume Ping meant 78gr.
Any answers to his seemingly very valid question? Is psi lower in the slower powder load?
|
|
|
Post by ping on Jan 6, 2015 15:31:44 GMT -5
Let's assume Ping meant 78gr. Any answers to his seemingly very valid question? Is psi lower in the slower powder load? I did mean 78 grains not 87. I corrected that typo in my original post but since its been copied 500 time the miss information is still on the board.. Sorry for the miss-hap...
|
|
|
Post by cowhunter on Jan 6, 2015 18:05:27 GMT -5
The problem I see with Ping's good question is that the HIS (Hankins Ignition System) and the Bad Bull ignition system are not the same. Mr. Hankins has not advocated or maybe even tested a load of 130-150 grains of 4350 in his guns. Bad Bull has never advocated using 78 grains of 4198 in its guns. Maybe the Bad Bull is not suited to shooting the 4198 for some reason. Based on the seemingly high pressures either of these loads might create, no one better try a load not recommended by the manufacturer. I noticed that Earnhardt can get over 3000 fps with only 120 grains of 4350. If he tried 140 grains he might have too much pressure in his gun, which has yet another ignition system.
|
|
|
Post by Jon on Jan 6, 2015 19:07:55 GMT -5
All very interesting and to me at least very informative Guys keep up the great work It is very informative to us people not lucky enough to get to the range near as often as we would like. Watching with great interest the difference in ignition systems. Especially now that we are getting into smaller bore slower powders heavier bullets and powder chambers. I do think that Jeff has the ideal system in the I4198 275 grain bullet range. But has been said that can be set off striking two rocks together?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 6, 2015 19:51:20 GMT -5
Let's assume Ping meant 78gr. Any answers to his seemingly very valid question? Is psi lower in the slower powder load? Yes, faster velocity and much lower pressure.
|
|
|
Post by 7mmfreak on Jan 6, 2015 20:03:26 GMT -5
The problem I see with Ping's good question is that the HIS (Hankins Ignition System) and the Bad Bull ignition system are not the same. Mr. Hankins has not advocated or maybe even tested a load of 130-150 grains of 4350 in his guns. Bad Bull has never advocated using 78 grains of 4198 in its guns. Maybe the Bad Bull is not suited to shooting the 4198 for some reason. Based on the seemingly high pressures either of these loads might create, no one better try a load not recommended by the manufacturer. I noticed that Earnhardt can get over 3000 fps with only 120 grains of 4350. If he tried 140 grains he might have too much pressure in his gun, which has yet another ignition system. I've not shot one of Jeff's guns (yet) but it should handle Hodgdon or IMR 4350 just fine just like Bad Bull should handle Hodgdon or IMR 4198. In a sealed system you should only be limited by pressure constraints and powder suitability for the application. In my limited experience with Bad Bull both of those powders (and likely any other powder too) eat his breech-plugs alive though because the are 2-piece and tolerances are not held close enough. I have watched several gas cut very badly and one locked in the barrel. It will happen in under 10 shots sometimes, as many as about 20 at other times and you can tell it is happening because precision will go from about .5 MOA to about 3 MOA very suddenly and powder falls through the vent hole. Others can contribute more.
|
|
|
Post by Jon on Jan 6, 2015 20:05:31 GMT -5
good info
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 24, 2015 18:56:51 GMT -5
Savage T/A 31" .458 Brux barrel 310 APB Sized in a Swinglock Full Form Die IMR3031 90 grains no booster CCI-M 209 primer I will not post velocities anymore. ES-4 The aiming point for each group is marked on the target with a number in a circle Group 1 was shot with very little wind. It was the first group I shot at 500 with this load and I was way off with the elevation. This Brux barrel seems to be more sensitive to temp variance than my other barrels are. That's where the vertical stringing is coming in I think. My aiming point is the center of the large bulls eye. Group 2 I adjusted elevation down 8 clicks. The Sightron 10-50x has a .18"/click adjustment at 100 yards. So at 500 yards, each click is .9". SE wind light to 5 mph (quartering from right rear) aiming point was the green ring on the right side of the target Group 3 No elevation adjustments Wind: E/NE ~ 5 mph, quartering from right front aiming point was far right side of the target I thought the wind was going to push the bullets over farther to the left, but I was wrong. I seemed to do a little better with the wind today, knowing that the groups aren't spread out so far horizontally from the wind. The horizontal spreads were 1 1/2" for Group 1, ~1" for Group 2, and ~ 1 1/4" for Group 3. But I don't like the vertical stringing. In my .451 30" Pacnor I could sometimes get the vertical spread down to 1 1/4". I need to work with the loads/gun a little more. Maybe I should bed the recoil lug and barrel a little bit, to see if that helps out.
|
|
|
Post by jims on Jan 24, 2015 20:58:44 GMT -5
The horizontal is good, like you I am surprised at the vertical difference.
|
|
|
Post by airborneike on Jan 24, 2015 21:37:33 GMT -5
Earnhardt/Josh,
B-17 is not doing too bad hovering around 1/2 moa or less @ 500 yards. You are now entering the world of precision shooting where every little thing matters to reduce group size. We call it "table manners" in bench rest shooting. Grip pressure, how tight against shoulder, return to battery and a whole slew of other tiny little ergonomics all add up to reduce group size.
You are certainly in a class by yourself using a ML.
One thing to watch IMO is making sure the bullets are lined up as perfect as possible when sizing...it would be easy to induce yaw into the bullets if they are not sized to near perfect concentricy.
I have never been able to get an ES of 4 with my bench gun so you are eliminating that as a problem.
Any problems with mirage? That can screw with your point of aim even when it is small. Look closely for barrel heat coming off the barrel and effecting you view through the scope. this can be a real problem and on my bench gun I attach length of venetian blind along the length of the barrel to disperse the heat out of the line of sight.
It would push most modern center fire rifles to hold half MOA @ 500 so you are on the crest of the accuracy curve.
Everything still working as it should with ignition?
Most people don't fully understand how special B-17 is, I have built many good bench rest rigs over the years and none of them are any better than what you have...Anxious to see just how good you can coax it to be.
All the best,
Mike
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 24, 2015 21:57:54 GMT -5
yes that's some good accuracy @ that distance. did I recall you mentioning that this rig is unbedded in a bedding block? If so I would try a bedding job and see if it helps the vertical issue, Im thinking it might help some...
|
|
|
Post by 7mmfreak on Jan 24, 2015 22:29:31 GMT -5
If it wasn't a V-block I would agree. Having sorted out an issue with a V-block once (turned out to be a pair of 16mm screws that should have been 14mm) in a match gun and having dealt with a few others I have learned they are different than what H-S or B&C call "bedding block". That style of bedding block needs skim bedding or a re-surfacing like LRI does but V-block are usually fine. I can say based on testing torque values in a V-block will change a group's characteristics.
|
|