Nosler Blems available

[smoothy8500]

How much does that 1.2gr difference really affect performance? That's .68% variation in weight, which placed into any ballistic calculator shows less than 1" change in elevation at 1,000yds. I agree that the biggest bugger with RDF's is the apparent seating depth sensitivity.

My biggest challenge is getting velocity ES down. A 30fps variation gives me +/- 1/2MOA from group center on the 1,000yd target, one full ring value.

[demolition]

I took the RDFs out yesterday . Loaded Long . .15 thou off lands . Under an inch group. They performed well out to 830 yards .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[smoothy8500]

I'm pretty content with the Nosler Custom Comp 175 Blems. The base to ogive measurements have been consistent and weight range of 5 randomly picked are way less than 0.6gr difference. Over-all they perform well within my acceptable limits at 600yd Midrange matches and last weekend's Long-Range match.

I will continue to use the Nosler CC blems. However, I can understand kcstott's disappointment with the RDF blems.

[saki302]

Just picked up some 8mm HPBT blems from a guy on gunboards- I really can't tell you why they are blems. They look nice. Nicer than some of my 1sts that have just sat in the garage for a few years.

-Dave

[kcstott]

How much variance do SMK have.
I'm simply assuming you have a pretty good scale, so it would be good to know.

Sierra has always claimed plus or minus .2 grains. I have always checked them and found them to be within .2 grains not plus or minus .2grains

As for the scale. Yeah I just bought a A&D milligram scale and a class 1 100 gram check weight. So this scale can discern .02grains. The check weight is 100 grams plus or minus .00025 grams, certified. It is so sensitive you can hold a cold drink over the scale and it will pick up the thermal air current pressing down on the plate. And I need to find a better location for it as it just so sensitive the slightest weight shift on my the floor and it picks up the movement.

[kcstott]

How much does that 1.2gr difference really affect performance? That's .68% variation in weight, which placed into any ballistic calculator shows less than 1" change in elevation at 1,000yds. I agree that the biggest bugger with RDF's is the apparent seating depth sensitivity.

My biggest challenge is getting velocity ES down. A 30fps variation gives me +/- 1/2MOA from group center on the 1,000yd target, one full ring value.

You now I don’t know, I’m more concerned with a velocity variation due to the weight difference. But I don’t know how good is good enough.

What I’ll do is load up three each of the lightest and heaviest bullets with the same powder charge and see what I get for a velocity variation. If it’s less than 20 FPS you can pretty much disregard the difference. But if it’s say 50 FPS well we have an issue. And if it turns out it’s not an issue we’ll you know what you can get away with. And that’s what this is all about.

[kcstott]

Ok after weighing 1000 bullets. my lightest ones were 174.2 and the heaviest ones were 175.9 with over 800 being within .4 grains of 175.0 and the vast majority of those being within .2 grains of 175.0

So i have about 191 odd ball weights that i'll load for my Garand for light load plinking stuff. I'll load and test two each of the lightest and heaviest bullets, Since only two were at the high end of the weight span, load those to the same powder charge in new brass with bench rest primers. and shoot them over the Magnetospeed and see if all this work was for a good reason or did i just lose about 8 hours of my life.

Here it is 30 years later Now i feel like Rick Jamison from th ereloading section of shooting times, dissecting loads and testing each component down to the gnats arse

[smoothy8500]

I did about 25 of the 168's and found the same results, a couple at .3gr, rest were .1 to .2gr from 168.0 which is well within reason. In my case, it ain't the projectile's fault when it strays outside of the X-ring...

[smoothy8500]

I can see why the "ex" kept you busy with other tasks instead of weighing 1,000 projectiles...

[kcstott]

I can see why the "ex" kept you busy with other tasks instead of weighing 1,000 projectiles...

Yeah I resemble that remark. Once the wheels start turning theres no stoping me till i have my data. I know for a fact its far more me behind the gun than the load. but there has been that one unexplained high or low round. That was the reason for the scale. then a buddy of mine put the thought in my head i should question my bullets consistency well at least the RDF blems, Oh well I'll know for sure in a week or so, may head out to the desert next weekend, But between now and then I need to work up load again that are a little colder and see if can get that brass to live a little longer I think 2650 out of a 24 barrel would be my max and 2550 out of my AR308 should be fine.

[OpenSightsOnly]

Ok after weighing 1000 bullets. my lightest ones were 174.2 and the heaviest ones were 175.9 with over 800 being within .4 grains of 175.0 and the vast majority of those being within .2 grains of 175.0

So i have about 191 odd ball weights that i'll load for my Garand for light load plinking stuff. I'll load and test two each of the lightest and heaviest bullets, Since only two were at the high end of the weight span, load those to the same powder charge in new brass with bench rest primers. and shoot them over the Magnetospeed and see if all this work was for a good reason or did i just lose about 8 hours of my life.

Here it is 30 years later Now i feel like Rick Jamison from th ereloading section of shooting times, dissecting loads and testing each component down to the gnats arse

Which one did you sort? 175 SMK or 175 RDF?

So out of 1k, 800 were at the most 0.4 grains from 175 grains while 200 were 0.2 grains from 175 grains. Is that right?

Are you going to bother to sort with bullet length via ogive or some other time?

[kcstott]

Which one did you sort? 175 SMK or 175 RDF?

So out of 1k, 800 were at the most 0.4 grains from 175 grains while 200 were 0.2 grains from 175 grains. Is that right?

Are you going to bother to sort with bullet length via ogive or some other time?

there's no need to sort SMKs. Every time i get a bulk box i check them to be sure i didn't get a bad batch but i'm not sorting them at all.

I sorted the RDF's due to a bug being put in my ear and I find some gross weight variations.

And no it wasn't 200 were within .2 of 175gr. 800 were within .4 grain and the vast majority of those were less than .2 from 175. The remaining 200 were below 174.8 and above 175.2 I had bullets that were as light as 174.25 and as heavy as 175.98 to be exact.
So those 200 on the outside of the curve are going to a iron sighted Garand. the 800 i sorted will be used in my F class matches and once they are gone I'm going back to SMK's exclusively. I'd love to shoot bergers but they are just to damn expensive and i see no difference between those and SMK's

I've also measured by Ogive and really see no reason to sort closer than .005" Guys sorting by Ogive with calipers to .001" is a joke. Calipers are not that precise. you need a drop indicator. but to do it really correct you need two comparators to really measure the bearing surface. No I don't have time for that. The SMK's shoot far better than i do. and I really don't see a need to tip them either. as Much as i want to. the RDF's are only a few clicks less elevation at 1000 yards, not enough to be impressed by, and the the seating depth sucks. Maybe the Nosler CC's are in my future????