SmallCaliberCentral

I went to the range this a.m. with my first ever rifle reloads, 32-grain loads for my Savage 12 VL. My goal was to see how close I could get to Hornady's claimed 4225 fps and maintain the amazing accuracy this rifle had displayed with factory ammo.

I needed a couple of shots to get the chrono properly positioned and the first shot that registered (30.2 grains of BL-C(2), which was supposed to be .5 grains below max) clocked at 4207 fps. Holy moley! Not only that, I tungsten coated this batch of bullets, which I was expecting to cost me 100 fps or so. The primer was pretty flat but not cratered and the head and shoulder miked to about the same a my reference once-fired Hornady casing.

So I fired the next round, loaded 0.1 hotter, 30.3 grains. It clocked at 4219 fps and its casing inspected about the same as the 4207 fps round.

At that point I began to think I'd somehow goofed and loaded them too hot, so I grabbed the other batch, same bullet but loaded with 25.4 grains of RL-10x, 0.9 grains below its max. It clocked at 4097 fps.

At that point I was convinced they were just too fast. Either I had screwed up both batches, or my scale (RCBS Rangemaster 750) was reading too low or my chrony (Chrony Beta) was reading too high. So I closed up shop and came home.

Measuring all the spent cartridges back home, I still found nominal differences between their expansion against the expansion of the reference spent factory load cases (Hornady and R-P). Nominal=too little for me to detect repeatably with this caliper. Unfortunately, I decapped all the factory loads and didn't keep one with a spent primer intact for a reference (or fire any more today) so I don't have anything to compare them to.

This shows the primer on the 4207 fps load, next to an unfired R-P factory round:



This is a side-view of primer from the 4219 fps round:


It definitely is a bit top-hatted but I also wonder if this might be because the primer wasn't seated deep enough.

The bolt lift effort did not seem to increase. Using an RCBS dial caliper, I couldn't tell spitting difference between the expansion at the shoulder and the head of my loads versus the reference spent factory loads. None of the primers showed cratering and, honestly, I don't think I would know the difference in a well-flatted primer and an excessively flattened primer. And I'm wondering if that top-hatting was because I just failed to install the primer deeply enough.

Bottom line, unless my scale is royally screwed up (it's new and unproved but, yes, I calibrated it before every use), I don't know but what everything I'm looking at -- except those chrono velocities -- is perfectly normal. Still, those velocities are so high, and I'm so new to this, I'm concerned I've somehow goofed.

So what do you think? I plan to check my scale against a mechanical one but won't have access to it until Monday. I didn't think to chrono a factory load. If it's "faster than advertised", that might be a clue that the chrono is out of whack. So I'll do that soon -- maybe tomorrow -- and update this post.

Range and load data:
Temp: 50°F
Wind: 2G7
Baro: 29.93"

First five rounds:
Brass: Once fired Hornady
Bullet: WS2-coated 32-grain Nosler
Primer: Federal match small rifle
COL: 2.34"
Powder: BL-C(2)
Charge: 30.0, 30.1, 30.2, 30.3 & 30.4

Final round:
Brass: Once fired Remington
Bullet: WS2-coated 32-grain Nosler
Primer: Federal match small rifle
COL: 2.34"
Powder: RL-10x
Charge: 25.4

Target on left ar-15 1:10 twist
Target on right Remington 700 1:12 twist
Bullet 34 grain Hex Boron Nitride coated varmint nightmare.
25.7 gr r10
Have gone to 26 grains without signs of overload, but 25.7 semms to be the sweet spot.

Fred_C_Dobbs--The velocities you are getting with your BL-C(2) loads seem to be well above what I would have thought you'd be getting with the loads you tested. Back on July 9, 2004, I tested some 32 gr. V-Max in Hornady brass out of my Savage VLP and fired only one shot with each progressively heavier powder charge. The temperature at the time I shot these loads was 70º. THESE LOADS WORKED IN MY RIFLE, BUT THEY MAY BE WAAAAAY TOO DANGEROUS FOR YOUR RIFLE. START LOW AND WORK YOUR LOADS UP IN SMALL INCREMENTS.Here's my results at 12 ft. from the muzzle.

29.0 gr.-----3,799 fps
29.5 gr.-----3,929 fps
30.5 gr.-----4,006 fps
30.4 gr.-----3,995 fps
30.7 gr.-----4,069 fps

On Auguest 12, 2004, I tested some HOTTER loads of BL-C(2). The temperature that day was 64º when I took these shots. Here are the results from those shots

31.0 gr.-----4,255 fps
31.3 gr.-----4,229 fps
31.5 gr.-----4,246 fps

I guess you could have a faulty chronograph and it might be wise to see if you could use someone else's chronograph to check the velocity of your loads against what you machine is reading. As for your scale, do you have check weights you can use to check the accuracy of your scale? Again, your velocities just seem way too fast for the charge weights you said you were shooting.

I guess you could have one of those barrels my gunsmith calls a "FAST" barrel and you might be getting more velocity than the average barrel, but you got nearly 200 fps more velocity with your 30.3 gr. load than I got with a 30.4 gr. load. It definitely makes you wonder

Silverfox wrote:...I guess you could have one of those barrels my gunsmith calls a "FAST" barrel and you might be getting more velocity than the average barrel, but you got nearly 200 fps more velocity with your 30.3 gr. load than I got with a 30.4 gr. load. It definitely makes you wonder

Silverfox, that was exactly why I stopped shooting. You don't mention whether your 2004 loads were coated but my bullets were WS2 coated, which should have made the difference in velocity even more pronounced. I increased loads in increments of 0.1 grains and had planned to shoot them from low charge to high until something told me to stop. I had a laundry list of excess pressure signs I was prepared to look for (excessively flattened primer, cratered primer, gas leakage around the primer, blown primer, pierced primer, pronounced pressure band, extractor marks, stiff bolt or hard ejection) but the only one I saw was the flattened/top hatted primer. And frankly, I'm pretty sure my primers were seated a little too shallow, which could have contributed to both of those.

The bolt lift and extraction effort were absolutely normal. I ease the bolt open so I don't have to chase the casing and I was able to gently make them stand at attention so I could remove them by hand.

The scale came with a set of standardized weights to be used for calibration so, yes, I have check weights. I calibrated the scale with them at the beginning of every session.

In fact, I found one bullet on an RL-10x load that I didn't seat properly and was a bit loose. This morning, I pulled that bullet out with my fingers and reweighed the charge. It was supposed to be a 26.1 grain load and it weighed 26.0. I figure I lost a couple of granules of powder in the transfer but certainly no more. And I immediately double-checked the scale against a 20 gram check weight and it was spot-on. Based on what I saw today, that is a normal charge and not an accidentally overloaded load.

The only thing I had tested with that chrono before were pellets from an airgun and subsonic .22 LRs. I'll check it against Hornady factory 32-grain loads for reference before I start testing reloads again.

Fred--My 2004 tests were done with bare bullets. While I shoot WS2 coated bullets in my .17 Tactical, and am now using hBN coated bullets in the .17 Remington, I have never shot a coated bullet out of my .204 Ruger.

If I have some time to fool around with my .204 Ruger next spring, I might try some hBN coated bullets in it. It shoots so good with the bare bullets that I hate to change one little thing. I do have a brand new 28" stainless steel super match grade Pac-Nor 1 in 11" twist 3-groove barrel sitting in my basement waiting to be chambered and installed on the Savage 12VLP action. I'll most likely have my gunsmith finish the barrel at 26" just like the factory tube. After about 5 to 10 shots with bare bullets down that barrel, I'll be coating my bullets with hBN from then on.

I'd sure like to have you keep posting your findings as you do more load testing. Your velocities with coated bullets just seem totally out of the norm from my experience with the powder and bullets you were using in your .204 Ruger.

One thing I've discovered with "my" Chronograph is;

- How high above the sensors the bullets are passing over. I have marked the rods on mine that hold the sun screens and I set mine up using those as a reference.

- The lighting conditions, especially shadows that cross over either of the two sensors.

- If at a range, any adjacent berms or walls that may create any turbelence.

- Muzzle blast, if the Chrony too close.

When I test I try to do it from the same spot at the range for consistence purposes, including the Chrony-to-muzzle distance.

HTH

Fred I have 2 204s a Ruger 77VT and a 26 inch barrel on my Oncore. I have been getting an average of 4125 to 4135 with 31.0 Grains of BLc-2 and the 32 gr Vmax . That is the same as I get from factory Hornady loads. I had worked up to this and the 30.7 max load was not much slower so I dropped back to this for my using load. This is with naked bullets and the Chrono set at 10ft. My best target with the 77VT so far is 5 shot at 100yds C to C of .171 I have not been able to duplicate that again, but have been getting .2 & low .3s enough to be encouraging for my aging eyes.

Well, nobody's commented about my primer pictures but what I am getting is that something just ain't right. I'm easily ~200 fps faster than I should be with a naked bullet, closer to ~300 fps with the WS2.

I'm about to head over to my 'smiths in a bit -- he's an old time reloader -- to let him look at my spent casings and see what he thinks. I'll test my scale against his and I also hope to set up my chrono out in his back lot and test some 32-grain Hornady factory loads to see how they clock. Maybe that will shed some light on the confusion.

FCD,

Please don't make a mountain out of a mole hill. Your load is fine and so is yoour rifle. I suspect your chrony is off a little, check it against another someday, or send it back to the factory. 200 fps is less than 5%. Mine reads faster on a sunny day than on a cloudy day. I called factory for an explanation and was told the sunshine glare off the bullet makes it appear larger to the screens. I made the shades larger and painted the bullets with a black marker and my sunny day readings equalled the cloudy days. Your problem might be something just as simple. Shooting buddy spent a lot more money on an Oehler and it seems right on every time.

Fred- welcome to the forum

Overall you have me stumped. I've used moly WS2 and currently HBN but like Silverfox not so much in the 204. I have used all in the 204 trying to correct problem factory tubes but eventually I have returned to naked pills. Just me, doesn't mean its right.
Anyhow a few questions.
I see your using once fired brass. Was that brass full length sized or neck sized? If FL sized have you measured the shoulders for correct setback. If your setting the shoulders back a lot more than needed that could give you the tophat primer problem. The firing pin will push the cartridge forward into the shoulders upon impact. The primer will then back out of the hole before the brass has a chance to catch up from expansion. Typically the result is usually extremely flattened primers with even mild loads. But maybe?????
Have you tried seating a fresh primer in these fired cases? Do they seat easy or sloppy or fall out? I've never seen tophatting primers and worry your close to case head rupture. Did that once myself and once is enough.
This is one simple test I would try .

Some lots of Hornady brass can have very tight primer pockets. Quessing you used this once fired brass from some factory ammo lot. If thats a correct quess and you still have some of that particular lot segregated test primer seating pressure between the two.
Excessive FL sizing of the case can increase pressures and velocity. Brass does not always spring and flex as fast as many shooters think.

Did you prep your super clean barrel with WS2 before firing the loads?
Supposedly this is not nescessary. I always do after a thorough cleaning. And you started out with some fairly hot loads.
When I first tried bullet lubes (moly) I read the opinion of a respected shooter that moly was only a lubricant against itself. IE both surfaces must be coated or it can possibly increase friction. The answer to that is beyond me but I get much better results prepping the tube as he suggested.
FWIW I now use a patch wet with lighter fluid. Shake some dry lube (WS2 in your case) on the patch as evenly as possible. Fold patch and rub back and forth. I use my Stoney Point cartridge to push that patch through the bore just once. Keeps that lube out of the chamber where its not wanted. I'll shoot a minimum of five foulers after doing this before expecting any normal accuracy to begin. Usually takes a few more with a fussy tube.

What solvent are you cleaning that factory tube with? Are you sure the copper is coming out?
If your unknowingly leaving copper in the throat it will build and create very high pressures eventually.
Cut my teeth with a Savage and own nothing else in a factory configuration. If its not a Savage it might as well be full blown custom
I still remember the pride I felt when my 204 factory Sav outshot all the customs in a 300yd eggshoot. Probably never happen again for me but once was enough (maybe )
Still with four factory 204 tubes behind me and #5 bolted on I've found some great accuracy potential but some very rough bores. Two barrels in particular I could swear where bored in the opposite direction of bullet travel. Coppered solid bright orange with just one shot. Normal breakin impossible, could'nt even clean them at the range to fire a second shot. Oddly these turned out to be the two most accurate barrels I ever had

I use nothing but SharpShooter Patch Out on all my rifles for copper. Some Hoppes or Shooters Choice to remove the bulk of the carbon and PatchOut for the copper. Should be left overnight for best results as per instructions. In my expierience no ammonia based product removes copper as efficiently as water based Patch Out and it will not harm the bore.

You are setting your chrono out 10-12 ft right?

I see your COL is pretty long. If your in the lands very high pressures can result. Book data is utilizes a large jump to the lands.

Lastly. The one powder I've tried in the 204 that left me with a feeling of dread was BLC2. Twas a long time ago and feelings fade but BLC2 felt like a very radical powder when I tried it. Pressures seemed very high while in the range of book data and I've been known to leave book data very far behind with other powders. It unnerved me at the time but I would retry it again today if I felt the need.

Sorry for the long post. Please do keep us informed. Maybe Hotshot is right but better safe than sorry.

I'm guessing the chrono was having me on that day. I've taken it to the range twice more since and the numbers in each instance have been more reasonable.

The digital scale scale I was using also was having problems, which made me all the more suspicious of those first .204 loads. I got a beam scale to double-check it with and everything is acting more rationally. I went back to the range today with the remainder of the cartridges from that loading session and the highest MV I got was 3182 fps with a 31.0 grain load, versus the 4219 I was getting earlier with 30.3 grains loaded during the same session.

So to answer my question in the OP, yes, they were. Sad, but true.

EDIT:
Sorry 'bout the typo. That should have been 4182 fps, not 3182 fps fps.

That Rl-10x load is just .3 grain above my favorite load of 25.2 grains (with the 26 grain Varmint Grenade) that delivers 4,085 fps average velocity for a ten shot average. If you are getting 4,097 fps that would indicate fairly good consistency given the differences between the platforms (Savage PTA with a Shilen Select Match barrel, Hornady brass).

I burned a lot of Bl-C2 at one time in numerous IHMSA handguns (bolt action Wichita and T/C's) and varmint rifles, it seemed to like either magnum small rifle primers or Remington 7 1/2 BR primers. It also has a narrow range of bullet weights that deliver best performance in any given cartridge.

My main load for production pistol was with Rl-7 and Remington 6 1/2 small rifle primers. Those primers would pin hole at the fold due to their soft thin cups, but pressure was normal. The primer cup just wasn't up to the pressure, but I accepted this due to the accuracy. Pin holes or blanking will erode your bolt face, so should be avoided. I have plenty of spare parts, so I could swap the T/C recoil plates as needed. Your primer problem might disappear with the Remington 7 1/2 BR as it has a tougher cup, or by switching to a magnum small rifle primer.

Seating primers deeper won't help, because the primer moves back against the bolt face before the case can follow, which causes the riveting effect (top hatting) you noted. If pressure is too high the case remains adhered to the chamber walls due to adhesion then slams back when pressure falls off riveting the slightly swollen primer. A similar effect can be seen when fire forming brass with loads that have pressure too low, as the primer will back out and the case not form fully, leaving the primer protruding and the case shortened with excessive headspace. If primers are seated too high it can create a problem with the bolt closing properly, erratic ignition, and in the case of my rifle, the Accu-Trigger may not drop the firing pin. They should average .004" below the case head.

Velocity and pressure are related, you may never be able to reach the same velocity as factory loads at a lower pressure, due to Hornady's use of a non-canister powder especially formulated for the .204 Ruger. I would back off a tad, selecting the most accurate load under published maximums, which also allows for ambient temperature extremes and barrel life.

I got further confirmation that my chrono is meshuge today. I was loading a .243 WSSM that also was producing chrono numbers that were too good to be true, and I couldn't find another chrono to borrow, so I decided to test the load at out to 400 yards and calculate MV from bullet drop.

I'd tested the same identical load at two range sessions and they'd chronoed at 3428 and 3377 fps. Available load data said there was no way I should have been over 3300. I measured the bullet drop today at 200, 300 and 400 yards and plugged the numbers into my favorite ballistic calculator. The numbers lined up almost perfectly and it came up with an MV of just 3220 fps. So it would appear my Chrony Beta is reading on the order of 5% too fast. Now I need to repeat this test with the .204 to see if the % of exaggeration remains constant.

Anybody know if chronographs tend to be sensitive to battery temperature? I ask because the two range sessions I made reference to above were at ~40°F, but that doesn't account for why the MVs were so high back in October.

So I finally sent my chono back to the factory for recalibration. The same loads that were giving me +/-4200 fps now are clocking 3900. I'd have preferred 4000 but now at least it's believable.

I spoke with one of the company's technicians. He said they calibrate the customer's chrono against their standardized until and they must match to within 1 fps.

Fred_C_Dobbs wrote:So I finally sent my chono back to the factory for recalibration. The same loads that were giving me +/-4200 fps now are clocking 3900. I'd have preferred 4000 but now at least it's believable.

I spoke with one of the company's technicians. He said they calibrate the customer's chrono against their standardized until and they must match to within 1 fps.

Maybe they should just put a dial on the chronos so we can adjust them ourselves.