Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 14, 2011 20:06:35 GMT -5
It was a perfect day to shoot.....7:30 am / 28 degrees and not a hint of wind.... I put my .45 Savage Pac-Nor back together again after sending it in to have it Black-iced and re-mounted the scope so I had to take it out to shoot. I decided a long time ago to stick with single powder loads so that's what I tested today...Two of my loads I had tested quite a bit previously so I wasn't surprised to see them prove themselves again. They were 60gns / N120 and my go to load 62gns / H4198. I also shot a couple 4759 groups, 50gns and 52gns and found some good potential with the 50gn load...All were shot using 200gn SST's, 195 Barnes and Blue Smooth sabots.... No pictures, but here are my limited results.
All were three shot groups.....
62gn H4198 / 200SST...Avg vel. 2675fps..... 3/4" CTC...100yds...
60gn N120 / 200SST...Avg vel. 2686fps..... 1" CTC...100yds...
50gn 4759 / 200SST... Avg vel. 2775fps....1 1/4"CTC....100yds....
52gn 4759 / 200SST... Avg vel. 2825fps....2" CTC...100yds...
47gn N110 / 200SST... Blown Sabot..Stopped
Finished up with a couple groups at 200yds....
62gn H4198 / 200SST / 2"CTC
62gn H4198 / 195 Barnes / 1 3/4" CTC
The 62 H4198 loads shot their norm today...somewhat boring ;D
The 60 N120 proved itself again...I might make that my go to load if it was more accessible.
The 50gn 4759 makes for a good single powder load I believe. The faster it got the more the groups opened up. I'm going to slow it down a couple gns to 47-48 and try that next time out.
Thanks to Richard on his 4759 load data.
No comment on N110....Maybe something there at a lower load.
Nothing scientific here....Just a day at the range from a guy who is blind in one eye and can barely see out of the other....One things for sure...I'm the weak link in my shooting results.
Zen
|
|
j1r11
8 Pointer
Posts: 178
|
Post by j1r11 on Mar 14, 2011 20:10:56 GMT -5
have you ever tried 61 or 62 gr. of N120?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 14, 2011 20:27:46 GMT -5
have you ever tried 61 or 62 gr. of N120? Yes I have... I've shot to 65gns. I experienced sabot failure with 65gns. It seemed the best accuracy for me was at 60gns. I'm happy with 2650-2750fps. The velocities I got today were about 75fps lower with the H4198 and N120 than I had gotten earlier at about the same temp. Don't know why. Zen |
|
|
|
Post by Jon on Mar 14, 2011 21:01:53 GMT -5
Zen. I feel your pain I'm also blind in one eye and I will have to have surgery on the one I can see out of again. The one saving grace I'm right handed and the one I can still sort of see out of is my right. Your right it doesn't contribute to good shooting. But with the scopes today it helps to get around the problem. Great post and great shooting.
Jon
|
|
|
|
Post by wayles on Mar 14, 2011 22:01:36 GMT -5
Hey Pal... Had a good day it looks like to me. Good Info also.
Wayne
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 14, 2011 22:56:06 GMT -5
Zen. I feel your pain I'm also blind in one eye and I will have to have surgery on the one I can see out of again. The one saving grace I'm right handed and the one I can still sort of see out of is my right. Your right it doesn't contribute to good shooting. But with the scopes today it helps to get around the problem. Great post and great shooting. Jon Hey Jon............ I'm not completely blind in one eye....Just cataracts ...My one good eye is marginal...Hard to keep focused ;D ;D Zen |
|
|
|
Post by dave d. on Mar 15, 2011 5:54:58 GMT -5
:)Zen very nice shooting. I'm with you singles are simple and easy. Sorry to hear about the eyes that makes those groups even more impressive.
|
|
|
|
Post by Richard on Mar 15, 2011 21:00:07 GMT -5
Zen.........glad the 4759 is working for you. On the N-110??? I have shot it saboted with the 200 gr. XTP with out blowing sabots but the accuracy was not there. I also shot 50 gr. with not so good results either. Today I shot .50 with the 200 FTX sabotless with less than stellar results. Targets and information to follow tomorrow.
Richard
|
|
|
|
Post by wilmsmeyer on Mar 16, 2011 5:33:26 GMT -5
Richard,
How is it that the .45's are safely and effectively shooting 50+ gr of N110 & 4759? The .50's are maxed out at 45-46 grains. What are pressures for those loads in a .45?
For instance, we can shoot H4198 in higher amounts in the .50 the the .45? Why is it the other way around with those other powders?
Maybe because of bullet weight being less?
|
|
|
|
Post by Savage Shooter on Mar 16, 2011 11:40:07 GMT -5
Been waiting for someone to ask or tackle this one.
This is what I was trying (ineffectively) to point out last week that the bullet weights being so light are still not building pressure as well, or at least with "some" powders.
My expectation was that the .45 would build pressure more than the .50, period, end of story.
Well that is only true if bullet weight is equal.
What I have since noticed (with most powders), is the .45 with 200gr bullet builds less pressure than the .50 with 250gr bullet.
Now inject that the powders burn rates are changing due to volume, bore diameter, projectile weights etc. it is a bit of a guess to really determine burn rates without shooting powders side by side with all else equal.
|
|
|
|
Post by Richard on Mar 16, 2011 18:13:58 GMT -5
Don't know??? If you look at the pressure traces I did with 55 gr. of N-110, they were the highest my unit would register. Even, as had beed discussed, with my readings being a bit on the low side...........36,000 psi---------------------And, adding 10,000 to it? That would still keep it unde 47,000.
Richard
|
|
|
|
Post by ET on Mar 17, 2011 19:46:16 GMT -5
Been waiting for someone to ask or tackle this one. This is what I was trying (ineffectively) to point out last week that the bullet weights being so light are still not building pressure as well, or at least with "some" powders. My expectation was that the .45 would build pressure more than the .50, period, end of story. Well that is only true if bullet weight is equal. What I have since noticed (with most powders), is the .45 with 200gr bullet builds less pressure than the .50 with 250gr bullet. Now inject that the powders burn rates are changing due to volume, bore diameter, projectile weights etc. it is a bit of a guess to really determine burn rates without shooting powders side by side with all else equal. Savage Shooter Basically I agree with everything said here. Yes I too find some of the burn rates inconsistent with charts I’ve read as I’m looking for another faster powder to include with exploring lighter bullets in the 50. I agree that a side by side usage without changing variables will reveal the true relationship between different powders, at least for the usage we employ. Isn’t it fun trying to make sense of Internal Ballistics?  Ed |
|
|
|
Post by Savage Shooter on Mar 17, 2011 19:55:24 GMT -5
Been waiting for someone to ask or tackle this one. This is what I was trying (ineffectively) to point out last week that the bullet weights being so light are still not building pressure as well, or at least with "some" powders. My expectation was that the .45 would build pressure more than the .50, period, end of story. Well that is only true if bullet weight is equal. What I have since noticed (with most powders), is the .45 with 200gr bullet builds less pressure than the .50 with 250gr bullet. Now inject that the powders burn rates are changing due to volume, bore diameter, projectile weights etc. it is a bit of a guess to really determine burn rates without shooting powders side by side with all else equal. Savage Shooter Basically I agree with everything said here. Yes I too find some of the burn rates inconsistent with charts I’ve read as I’m looking for another faster powder to include with exploring lighter bullets in the 50. I agree that a side by side usage without changing variables will reveal the true relationship between different powders, at least for the usage we employ. Isn’t it fun trying to make sense of Internal Ballistics? Ed Yes it is, and quite a challenge at times too. I learn something new with every change. |
|
