extreme reloading

[bigbore96]

I want to make the most accurate gun in the world
so that means the best cartridge and I believe in order for me to do that I will have to make most of the parts myself

I want to make every part that I can I know I can make the bullets but I don't know about the case, primer, or powder

If any one knows a way to make any of these three I would appreciate the comments

[alex0535]

You are not going to be able to make primers or brass in any efficient manner.

You would be better off buying some good reloading equipment, quality brass, primers and match grade bullets, and teach yourself how to assemble those components in the most uniform manner you can achieve. There is an art to assembling ammunition that is next to perfect. You won't get there by making every piece yourself.

[jmr40]

Muzzle loader?

I don't know how, but it is possible to make every componet with 18th century methods that could be done at home with fairly common components. This includes guns and barrels.

I don't see it being practical to try to make modern powder or primers. You could work wth a wildcat cartridge where you modify existing brass to fit your gun.

[Mobuck]

You're going to do a better job than a manufacturing process with 150 years of R&D plus a few million in technology???????????????????????????
Let me qualify this comment. You may be able to assemble ammo using components that will be more accurate or functional than factory made but you can't possibly turn out the components as precisely as the factory.

[mapsjanhere]

You won't be making powder, both from a chemical point of view and due to the need of very precise processing equipment. You can make your own brass, but you will never achieve the quality of high-end manufacture. If you want the best brass, buy Lapua or another top brand, and sort your cartridges by weight and dimensions, discarding anything that doesn't match your tolerances. Then fireform to your chamber, and neck size only. Spend $500 in Mitutoyo dials and calipers and start trimming.
So all that's not actually extreme but typical bench rest practice, the guys that think 10 rounds of 6 mm through an 8 mm hole is a decent day. On second thought, it's extreme, but you won't be alone.

[BigD_in_FL]

Agree, 6mm BR is THE cartridge - spend your time trimming, weighing and loading ammo

[Bart B.]

mapsjanhere, you say to sort and measure cases then fireform to your chamber, and neck size only. Why not do what most benchresters finally learned a few years ago and left neck sizing then began to full length size their fired cases in dies with neck bushings and no expander balls? It took them several decades to learn that. Other competitive discplines have been full length sizing their fired cases since the 1950's and have shot test groups smaller than current bench rest records.

Proper full length sized bottleneck cases will always fit the chamber better centering the bullet to the bore than neck only sized ones. And they'll ensure the bolt closes into firing position exactly the same for each shot whereas neck only on the same case does not.

[Bart B.]

bigbore, all that's possible, but it might take a few months (years?) as well as a very thick billfold.

All you need to do is hire folks from ammo plants to work part time showing you how to acquire (buy with lots of money) the machine tools to make cases out of sheets of cartridge brass, bullets out of sheets of jacket material and lead cores, primers with cups, anvils, compounds and a sealer and the powder mixing the chemicals and shaping them into granules.

Then have them train your to operate all that stuff once licences and permits have been secured from all the local authorities.

Or spend $500 on good tools and components, then learn how to use them to put together 100 rounds of extremely accurate ammo.

[603Country]

I kept hearing about those bushing dies, and some of ya'll know I bought and tested one (along with other type dies). 223 Ammo assembled using the FL bushing die did not shoot as well as ammo assembled using the Lee Collet die. I did get a larger bushing and will see if that improves loads made with the bushing die. And, just for comparison, I used that Redding bushing die with and without the expander ball. I got slightly better accuracy without the expander ball, just like BartB said I would.

Except for that Lee Collet Die, which gave me the best accuracy and which is a neck sizing die, full length sizing with the Redding Standard FL die and with the Bushing Die gave better accuracy than when I used the Redding standard Neck Sizing Die. That was most definitely a surprise to me.

Are my own personal conclusions about the dies and the related accuracy correct? Darned if I know, but I did come away with respect for that Lee Collet Die. I will buy more of them. And I'm not finished testing the Redding FL Bushing Die, but I want to try it with brand new cases and brand new once-fired cases, which are (no surprise here) backordered.

[kraigwy]

Before you get carried away, google and read;


Secrets of the Huston Warehouse

and

Dr. Manns, "The bulets flight,from powder to target"

[handlerer2]

Gee. I have to wonder some, if you really realize what you want to do. I bet every member of this forum respects accuracy.

I remember a statistic I read in the 1976 issue of the Speer manual. The world benchrest centerfire record was .030", five shot group at 100yds. That's 30 thousanths of one inch over the bullet diameter, at that time it was a 222REM, I believe. The last time I looked and it was probably two years ago the record was .019". So in thirty seven years they improved the accuracy of benchrest riflery by 11 thousanths of an inch.

These dedicated riflemen ingeniously improved upon the state of the art of the ballistics industry, by trimming, weighing, measuring and trying everything they could think of to make the next shot the same as the last one. At considerable cost I might add.

I have owned and reloaded for many handguns and rifles and there is a sizable learning curve before there's any real satisfaction of excellence.

I always wanted a very accurate rifle. I jumped for joy the first time I shot a .25" 5 shot group. all it took was a $2000 rifle , a $1200 scope, and 38 years of learning, and I still consider myself a beginner.

I wish you every success, but remain sceptical that really know what you have to do. Just the chemistry involved in the primer would take the resources of a university chemistry department to reformulate from scratch.

Remember safety!!!!!

[Bart B.]

It's interesting to me how folks measure accuracy.

To some, it's the smallest group ever fired. Could be the smallest few-shot group fired with a given load. Might be the many-dozen shot group with the smallest mean radius of shot holes from group center. Remember that every rifle and ammo combo holding smallest-group records rarely, if ever, shoots another group that size. All the rest are bigger; how much is difficult to know 'cause benchresters typically keep them secret.

Kraig's reference to the "Secrets of the Houston Warehouse" is a good example of several few-shot groups. They are impressive as are anything that shoots in the zero's (groups under 1/10th MOA).

I've seen 10-shot groups fired at Sierra Bullets' plant in California from .308 Win. chambered rail guns with 168 and 190 HPMK's shot at their 100-yard indoor range were in the zeros, too. With a good batch of jacket material and lead cores, groups in the zeros would happen time after time after time for several dozen tests in a row while one lot of bullets were being made. In contrast to those shot in that Texas warehouse, Sierra's came from full length sized cases shot in SAAMI spec chambers; no tight necks at all. When the final machine making those bullets was spittin' 'em out and 10 at a time were grabbed, stuffed into cases and immediately fired. As long as the 10-shot test groups were well under 2/10ths inch, that run of bullets would be set aside for special packaging. Sierra's specs for their 168 and 190 HPMK's was test groups had to average .250" at 100 yards; some would be up to about .350"

Then there's the test at 600 yards made back in 1971 by one of the Nat'l Champs testing his 26" Hart barreled Win. 70 wood stocked .308 with 185-gr. FMJBT bullets as perfect as he could find. With the rifle clamped in his machine rest (equal to any benchrest rail gun so shot), he fired several 10-shot groups. His WCC58 cases were all full length sized and stuffed into a SAAMI spec standard chamber. All the groups were 1.5 inch or smaller; smallest about .7 inch. At 600 yards, that's .117 MOA to .250 MOA. Then he fired a 40-shot group with that ammo into 1.92" at 600 yards from that rifle.

Readers can decide for themselves which is "best" accuracy; several 5-shot groups from neck sized cases in the zeros at 100 yards fired indoors or several 10-shot groups from full length sized cases in the ones and twos fired at 600 yards.

It's happens that some folks using the tools that others use to get fantastic results just doesn't happen with their using them. As the variables in a given tool are extremely small, I don't think it's the tool's fault.

Benchresters did not change over to full length sizing dies to shoot the tiniest groups. Their smallest groups fired with neck sizing and full length sizing their fired cases stayed the same. What changed was the size of the largest groups fired. What's more accurate, something that shoots from 1 to 6 units of measurement or 1 to 4?

[eldermike]

I think the record 100 yard group back when I was shooting bench rest was .009/inch. A rail gun in 6mm PPC is the way to proceed if you want to improve on this record. (might be called bench rest today, not sure really).

[mapsjanhere]

Bart, sorry for not being up to date on making bench rest ammo. Nowadays I just feed a box of eley tenex into an Anschuetz if I want tiny holes.

[Bart B.]

mapsjanhere, I also have fed Eley Tenex to my Anschutz. But I've often got better results with RWS R50 and R100.

[sundog]

Start where Kraigwy pointed you...

[Jim Watson]

I am sure there are a few people around who swage their own bullets. The equipment is available.
That should occupy the OP's attention while he figures out how to tool up for brass, powder, and primers.

[mapsjanhere]

Bart, you have to be a better shot than me to see the differences at that level. So I was amazed about the differences ammo made from the same gun. Remington 550 box 2 inches, Remington Match less than 1", Eley Tenex clover leaves or better. As I don't have access to an indoor range and we usually have 10 mph wind here I don't get single holes.

[bigbore96]

thanks for all the comments I was not expecting to make my own powder or primers but I thought it would be cool, but it seems too difficult

so if I have to buy them which brands would be the best for accuracy

[Bart B.]

Wolf's primers made in Russia were the favorites of competitors. I understand the plant in Russia that made them now does it for TULAMMO:

http://tulammousa.com/news/

Depending on how one tests primers, any brand and type may produce the results that meets the tester's objectives. Primers are exactly like bullets; people like the ones that meet their objectives.

[Picher]

BigBore96:

Don't take this badly, but you don't seem to know enough about rifles and components to be able to build an accurate rifle. You probably don't have the equipment necessary either.

The first thing to do is to buy a very good benchrest rifle in a caliber (like 6mm PPC), very good reloading equipment, and get very good advice for picking the proper components and how to assemble them for best accuracy.

After that, you'll need a very good front and rear rest, some quality windflags, and learn how to dope wind. After you burn out a couple of barrels, you'll probably become a pretty good centerfire benchrest shooter. (Then, if you wish, you're ready to learn how to shoot the more difficult game, Rimfire Benchrest.)

[Bart B.]

Bigbore96, Picher's suggestions are great for learning how rifles and ammo shoots accurately. If you want to learn, and excel with, the skills and knowledge of shooting rifles off your shoulder, get a high end match rifle that's fired at targets from 200 to 1000 yards from standing, sitting and from prone postions. You have to hold these rifles still by yourself. Benchrest rifles sit atop rests perfectly still and are virtually untouched by humans except for their trigger finger on a 2-ounce trigger.

There's no accuracy difference between benchrest and match rifles; the best of both types shoot under 1/4 MOA at 100 yards, 1/3 MOA at 300, 1/2 MOA at 600 and 3/4 MOA at 1000. It's how each is held that makes groups shot in competition in benchrest matches measured to much smaller dimensions that what's shot from hand held, shoulder mounted, match rifles on their targets.

[Tom68]

I have to admit, when I first saw the title of this thread I thought I was about to be treated to a description of how someone had put together a handload for his .30/06 that hit 3500 fps and was within safe pressures.

instead, I learned a little by reading the comments, as I so often do.

BTW, I hope none of you have found a 3500 fps load for your .30/06 that you claim to be "safe"

[mapsjanhere]

Well, these guys claim to do 4000 ft/s safe...

[Bart B.]

Tom68 comments:

BTW, I hope none of you have found a 3500 fps load for your .30/06 that you claim to be "safe"

Folks have been loading 59 to 60 grains of IMR4895 under 110-gr. varmint bullets in .30-06 cases for decades. That puts 'em out the barrel at 3500 fps. Some factory loaded 110-gr. ammo did the same thing. Check Hodgdon's web site for load data with pressure listed.