Back into Reloading......

[MadMadHoosier]

Sounds like something is loose or your scope is not holding zero.

I’m pretty sure most commercial muzzle devices have multiples more clearance than that brake though so maybe there’s something to that?

If the gun had been set up well with quality components, every time I've blamed the scope it was a waste of time down that rabbit hole. Almost always a carbon ring in the barrel that needed cleaning, or occasionally a loose muzzle brake. YMMV.

 

[West_Fork]

Sounds like something is loose or your scope is not holding zero.

I’m pretty sure most commercial muzzle devices have multiples more clearance than that brake though so maybe there’s something to that?

The scope is my biggest worry.
Started checking things last night, and the first thing was the new brake. I had reamed it to .250 and did not do a good job of cleaning the burrs. After 100 rounds it had choked down to .247. That's .002" bullet clearance. No signs of copper anywhere, so I guess my bore alignment is pretty dang good. I reamed it to .265. Hopefully this is it.
Seems like when I originally made the brake I started at .250 because I wanted to see if minimal clearance was a good or bad thing. I guess I found my answer.

 

[bigboreblr]

For you folks who reload for AR's, do you need special primers like other military like guns? LArge rifle primers are CCI #34's for garands, m1a's, 7.62x39.

Once all my existing guns and the new one are in good order, going to pick up a .223 bolt gun. Might be a 2026 thing. Once these trees and the next plot is going, kicking back a gear at camp.

 

[b116757]

I don’t run the harder cup primers and have never had a slam fire. I’m not saying it’s impossible but I’ve never had it happen and I’ve loaded many thousands of rounds of 223 ammo the vast majority shot out of an AR. Mostly I use standard 400 cci’s I picked up 12,0000 fiocchi here a while back but haven’t tried any of them yet.

 

[bigboreblr]

I don’t run the harder cup primers and have never had a slam fire. I’m not saying it’s impossible but I’ve never had it happen and I’ve loaded many thousands of rounds of 223 ammo the vast majority shot out of an AR. Mostly I use standard 400 cci’s I picked up 12,0000 fiocchi here a while back but haven’t tried any of them yet.

i had the cmplete opposite problem with my savage 24V. I needed the easiest to fire primers there was. Federal primers did the trick. Oddly enough, they make alot of AR15 ammo for uncle sam.

I've known a few folks over the years reload for AR's and use regular primers, but that was a while ago.

Put in another order from grafs for 450 bushmaster and 7.62x39 dies, brass, heads, and trimming tools.

The gusnhop that is recieving my 50 cal flintlock had one of these on sale. 450 bushwhacker. Loading it lightly though. Gonna be the three S's for my backyard. Inlaws next door consider it "their deer". IF this is true, why do I have to gut it and cut it up then? Guess im a sucker for dirty work. 395's with a light dose of AA1680 keep it at 1000fps.

 

[bigboreblr]

Remington heads are 395grs. Bought 150 of those and some hornady XTP 250gr heads. Not sure I need the 395gr weight. If they don't kick too bad and group ok. I'll stick with them. Rarely need over 100 yards at home.

Going to the quarry this afternoon to try the 450 marlin 300gr lght loads, the 30-30 more or less standard 150gr loads, and maybe the 308. Deer for 2025 hopefull will be bow at the farmland, and buck at camp. Probably won't rifle hunt where I need the 308 in 2025.

 

[Electrodigical]

i had the cmplete opposite problem with my savage 24V.

Don't recall if I mentioned it before, the main spring strut on them (the end of it) starts to cock a little when they get old, the geometry change starts giving you light strikes. Also headspace can be fussy with them. My 30-30 was fine with factory ammo. Handloads it didn't like. I didn't keep it long enough to work through the issue. (Regret selling it, to fund another project that never happened. Also sold a Marlin 94 in .32-20 to fund that same project another time, and a Ruger .44 Mag carbine to fun that same thing a third time. All three times never happened. The grass projects are always greener... )


As for AR primers, I had one rifle that showed pressure signs (cupping) way too soon without them, I'm guessing due to a larger firing pin hole or the tolerances between it and the firing pin.

 

[bigboreblr]

Sent that savage 24 down the river a decade ago. Sometimes I regret buying more guns. The others fee left out. Seems I have less time and opportunity to shoot than I used to.

I shot my guns for like 20 minutes today..........................

Went with the oldest kid and his girl. She didnt eat anything and was hangry, had to go back sooner.... But, sighted in the wife's SKS with the new red dot sight. Did good. Only shot the lightest load on the 30-30. i was rushed so the groups weren't that great. Finally, shot 3 or 4 rounds on the browning BLR. Impressed, the recoil is stout but much milder than 325gr factory FTX's. No clue on accuracy, just dumped a few rounds into the quarry bank while packing up.

The kids shoot handguns more, so I got to wait for them to be clear. I do like 15 times more shooting without them there.

But, about 90% finished with pruning. Collected all the scions I needed and they're in the fridge.

Ordered 7.62x39 and 450 bushmaster stuff the other day.

 

[West_Fork]

Success. I finally got time to put ten rounds down range after opening the brake up to .260. It returned to zero, velocities stabilized to single digit SDs, and I put ten rounds into a half inch with less than perfect conditions and mental state. That has to be the most drastic change I have ever seen in a rifle after making some changes. Tight bullet clearances on muzzle devices is not a good thing.

 

[Foggy47]

Success. I finally got time to put ten rounds down range after opening the brake up to .260. It returned to zero, velocities stabilized to single digit SDs, and I put ten rounds into a half inch with less than perfect conditions and mental state. That has to be the most drastic change I have ever seen in a rifle after making some changes. Tight bullet clearances on muzzle devices is not a good thing.

I have wondered this too. Not sure what "normal" for bullet clearance is on most brakes or how it impacts accuracy.

 

[Wind Gypsy]

I’m pretty sure most are in the neighborhood of 0.030” larger than bullet diameter. Suppressor end caps a fair bit more.

 

[Foggy47]

Just a FWIW. If your looking for ultimate accuracy at reasonable ranges.....flat based bullets seem to perform much better than boat tails....IME. Maybe that is somewhat different at extended ranges as the effects of drag can lead to accuracy issues too ( So much has changed in the past 20+ years regarding bullets....that I hate to say any "absolutes"). I realize that very low drag bullets are all the rage with long-range shooters.

The base of the bullet and the condition of the muzzle can be of prime importance to accuracy. Any imperfections in either can alter the bullet flight quite dramatically. One reason I question muzzle brakes where various situations could cause the bullets to "tip" (again...IMO).

 

[West_Fork]

Yeh, I about crapped myself when I measured my brake and it had about .002" clearance, it only took a couple hours to remember that my plan was to start small and open it up to see what happens. I think at .250 it was too small and affecting the bullet. A few more thousands in carbon and metal burs beeing blown forward and it went to crap in a hurry. 030 sounds about right.

Foggy's comment about the muzzle is one that I have spent a little time considering and why I do not chamfer the bore on a muzzle. Seems most factory barrels have a slight chamfer on the muzzle exit. I do not like the idea as it could cause an uneven exit with a lot of gas escaping from one side of the bullet. I just cut them square and let the first couple rounds clean it up.

After yesterday though, I am ordering 8 lbs of Viht 565. I am sold. This fits that dead zone between 4831 and stuff like Retumbo, and is working well in my 243W.

Seems like most BR shooters use flat base up to 300 yards?

 

[Foggy47]

Yeh, I about crapped myself when I measured my brake and it had about .002" clearance, it only took a couple hours to remember that my plan was to start small and open it up to see what happens. I think at .250 it was too small and affecting the bullet. A few more thousands in carbon and metal burs beeing blown forward and it went to crap in a hurry. 030 sounds about right.

Foggy's comment about the muzzle is one that I have spent a little time considering and why I do not chamfer the bore on a muzzle. Seems most factory barrels have a slight chamfer on the muzzle exit. I do not like the idea as it could cause an uneven exit with a lot of gas escaping from one side of the bullet. I just cut them square and let the first couple rounds clean it up.

After yesterday though, I am ordering 8 lbs of Viht 565. I am sold. This fits that dead zone between 4831 and stuff like Retumbo, and is working well in my 243W.

Seems like most BR shooters use flat base up to 300 yards?

I don't recall ever seeing a BR shooter with anything but a flat based bullet. Based on that.....I prefer them for hunting at reasonable yardages.

 

[Wind Gypsy]

I don't recall ever seeing a BR shooter with anything but a flat based bullet. Based on that.....I prefer them for hunting at reasonable yardages.

1000 yard BR definitely doesn't use em but basically nobody should be shooting at animals that far away. I'd think 300 is starting hit the turning point on the max precision vs wind forgiveness tradeoffs? Those guys can tune high BC bullets into one holers with high BC bullets too.

Agree it doesn't much matter either way for vast majority of hunting.

 

[Electrodigical]

Years ago I remember reading in some very old text, that round nose bullets were the most accurate. But not as good at longer ranges. And I often wonder about that. You'd be hard pressed to prove it today, there's so few round nose bullets, and likely none of "match grade" quality. So you'd be comparing apples to oranges.
As well, I wonder how much of that determination, at the time, wasn't the same thing but in reverse. Maybe at the time they could make round nose bullets more consistent than they could spire points. So was that apples to apples? Guess we'll never know.

 

[West_Fork]

Years ago I remember reading in some very old text, that round nose bullets were the most accurate. But not as good at longer ranges. And I often wonder about that. You'd be hard pressed to prove it today, there's so few round nose bullets, and likely none of "match grade" quality. So you'd be comparing apples to oranges.
As well, I wonder how much of that determination, at the time, wasn't the same thing but in reverse. Maybe at the time they could make round nose bullets more consistent than they could spire points. So was that apples to apples? Guess we'll never know.

And was twist rate considered? Longer bullets need a faster twist. Regardless of the parameters, it probably resulted in increased sales of round nosed bullets. But it does make me wonder, with the ranges of most ethical hunting scenarios and the increase in weapon accuracy, would we be better off sticking to round nose for hunting? Look at how much marketing goes in to the ultimate energy retaining super duper pointy bullet that is guaranteed to performed after it was over engineered to fail. Why not just use what is known to work well, round nose?

 

[Foggy47]

And was twist rate considered? Longer bullets need a faster twist. Regardless of the parameters, it probably resulted in increased sales of round nosed bullets. But it does make me wonder, with the ranges of most ethical hunting scenarios and the increase in weapon accuracy, would we be better off sticking to round nose for hunting? Look at how much marketing goes in to the ultimate energy retaining super duper pointy bullet that is guaranteed to performed after it was over engineered to fail. Why not just use what is known to work well, round nose?

Some of the most accurate (and deadly) bullets I have used are good 'ole Remington Core Loc'ts. I bought allot of those in 22 bulk from Midway, back when I was reloading them for PD shoots. Also bought lots of "seconds" from Sierra when I was traveling though Missouri visiting the customers. Those "seconds" just had a little excess lead on the tips that needed to be trimmed. I think I paid about 3 cents / bullet for those. Some guys had bought Hodgedon powder by the 55 gallon drum back then. I missed out on that deal. Seems to me it was $1 dollar and some change / lb.

I still remember when Midway had a one page flyer with ALL the things they offered on that single page. About the time I started selling them things, they had expanded to a mini catalog of maybe six pages. Pretty humble beginnings.

 

[Electrodigical]

Look at how much marketing goes in to the ultimate energy retaining super duper pointy bullet that is guaranteed to performed after it was over engineered to fail.

I see so many talking about how the 6.5 CM has let them down with killing power. Yet for decades 6.5's were known for punching well above their weight class. IMO mostly because they were long, heavy for caliber bullets, designed to expand and the relatively moderate velocities of the 6.5's of the time period. In recent years the 6.5 became the darling of the longer range shooter. Folks are all shooting sexy looking VLD bullets, often not designed for use on game, and often at ranges much farther greater than their abilities are up to (but they think it's okay now that they had a super sniper wonder rifle/cartridge.)

The text I was referencing about round nose bullets was probably close to 100 years ago (now that I realize it's 2025 lol) Maybe it was Hatcher? I don't remember anymore. When I was younger I read everything and anything I could get my hands on. Loved reading. Comprehension good, retention poor. ;)

 

[Jerry-B-WI]

And was twist rate considered? Longer bullets need a faster twist. Regardless of the parameters, it probably resulted in increased sales of round nosed bullets. But it does make me wonder, with the ranges of most ethical hunting scenarios and the increase in weapon accuracy, would we be better off sticking to round nose for hunting? Look at how much marketing goes in to the ultimate energy retaining super duper pointy bullet that is guaranteed to performed after it was over engineered to fail. Why not just use what is known to work well, round nose?

When you say longer do you mean same weight but different caliber? Or just heavier, thus longer, of the same caliber?