308 Newbie to Reloading

[browninghunter86]

When using the bushing to measure headspace I am noticing alot of play. The case wobbles very easy and very hard to align on caliper jaw to get readings. Is there a way to fix this or is this normal?

On the bullet comparator insert it sits in nicely and barely moves. I am wandering if the headspace bushing is suppose to be this way too


Anyone have this issue?

[Unclenick]

You can buy the Hornady anvil for the other jaw of the caliper to give you a flatter platform.

The play may also be due to head unevenness. Stand the cases up in a line and use a couple of rulers on the table to push the heads into a perfectly straight row. Then sight down the row and see if the necks all line up perfectly, too. If not, if some are slightly off due to tipping, then the heads are indented or out of square. They may then need to be dragged lightly over a piece of fine wood sandpaper (avoid silicone carbide wet/dry paper, as it can embed particles in the brass) to smooth down the high spots.

[browninghunter86]

will post pics. had a good range session today with the found range brass I worked on and best group was sub MOA. Everything chambered fine and ejected easy and shot well. Thanks everyone in this forum for the help and tips. Greatly appreciated

[browninghunter86]

Anyone suggest a good balance scale that will not break the bank? Lee scale will not give me same reading twice with the same charge even though nothing has changed or been bumped or moved or anything. very frustrating!! scale is way to sensative with no way to lock in the zero once you get it

Please help because one day I load up the weight I want and the next time I do it don't know if I am even shooting the same charge....

[mrawesome22]

Redding makes a great beam scale. Every balance will need re-zeroed if you move it.

The Lee is a pos waste of money.

[browninghunter86]

agreed 100%. I was looking at the RCBS 502 vs 505 and the Dillon Eliminator scale. Any thoughts on these options?

[mrawesome22]

Anything Dillon will be nice.

505 and 502 hqve that thin hollow base and might walk around on ya.

I like the redding bacause of the cast iron.

If you take measuring powder from a chore to a pleasure, check out the Hornady auto charhe. Love mine. One of my better investments.

[browninghunter86]

that would be awesome to have. I am assuming the RCBS and Hornady one is probably about 99.9% accurate to whatever you put in for it to dispense the powder charge weight

[Rob96]

Don't understand the discontent with the Lee scale. I use the scale and Perfect Powder measure and I get very consistent loads. Out of my Remington 700 ADL Varmint in 308 I get .65moa group after group.

[browninghunter86]

Rob96:I am not sure why either thats why it is frustrating. Finally got it to zero lastnight and hold and put 40gr of RL-15 in. Slowly took off the scale and then put it back on. Result=above zero mark, took it off and put it back on result=above, repeated=below, repeated=zero line...... something is wack with this scale. Placing the pan on same way everytime and no air movement or flourecent light or other magnets or anything to mess with the readings

[dacaur]

Weird. Mine is 100% accurate and repeatable. Remember though that the arrow just above or below the line is only 1/20grain off... any little air movment can make a difference....

[browninghunter86]

dacaur: you helped me the other week and made sure followed everything and it is still acting weird. not air flow or anything. I am going to call Lee Monday to discuss. It should be atleast repeating the readings if I am not bumping or messing with it.....

[BDS-THR]

Originally Posted by lonon007

What primers are good? Should use benchrest primers or std large rifles?

Although I started with CCI BR2/Winchester LR primers for .308, I have recently used Wolf/Tula LR primers with good results.

The Rifleman's Journal did a comprehensive primer comparison here - http://riflemansjournal.blogspot.com...mer-study.html

[browninghunter86]

Just learning about reloading but I am going to give WOLF primers a try. PVI has them for $16/1000 and I read they are great for accuracy. Have used CCI with no issues but almost triple the cost. Anyone correct me if I am wrong about WOLF primers KVB7s

[Unclenick]

Those are the same Russian primers PMC used to brand and that are mentioned in the article BDS-THR linked to, and everything I've seen shows they may be the best accuracy primers you can buy in the U.S. at this time (nobody is currently importing the RWS also mentioned, AFAIK). We've seen posts complaining about them for hard seating or about apparent bad lots and ignition failures (most likely a hardness issue for some guns; they need a full power striker impact), but the article indicates only the Russian and RWS primers delivered below 1100 psi peak pressure ES spread in the .30-06 tests, being not quite half that of the best of the other commercially available primers at this time. Measurements by one of our board members in another thread showed the same low ES from both the standard and magnum versions. I'm currently experimenting with the KVB762 from TulAmmo, and finding it very consistent. I am using the K&M primer tool with it that is mentioned in the article.

Apropos of another current thread on primer pocket cleanliness, the article mentions that clean, uniform primer pockets are important to accuracy, as they affect your ability to uniformly feel seating. That feel turns out, form Creighton Audette's work in the mid-90's, to be critical to obtaining top precision performance. The point is made that primers are analog and not digital as most assume, and how deeply you seat them affects ignition characteristics, so, as with many other things in loading and shooting, consistency is king.

[browninghunter86]

Unclenick: when using Dan's OCW and you find the three groups that have same POI what is the next thing to do with the charge? Say if it is not very tight group...is it adjust seating depth or go up or down 0.1gr? I assume do the 10 shot method you mentioned to verify the charge before doing any adjustments also....

[Unclenick]

You could overlap your three groups to see how they look, collectively. This why I usually use individual targets for these round robins; it's easy to pick them up, overlay them, and hold them up to the light. If your targets don't allow that and you're looking for validation anyway, simply try the middle load of the three with 10 shots. Remember, you are looking for a load that isn't very sensitive to exact charge weight, so it follows that changing a tenth of a grain here and there should not affect it significantly. That's part of the purpose of the system.

If you found an isolated tighter group somewhere in the round robin, go ahead and try that with ten shots, too. Indeed, take that load and the middle load of the three in a row you had and fire them alternately onto two targets. That will equalize the effect of barrel temperature and other conditions between the two loads. If the resulting ten shots with that isolated, tighter group comes out significantly better than the middle load from the POI three in a row, you may simply have a combination of powder and bullet for which a tight OCW load doesn't work out in your gun.

I've lost track of whether you are using the 165 SST or the 168 SMK, currently, but I would be using the latter for exploring the gun's accuracy potential. I'm not at all knocking the SST, but, in general, match bullets are a bit tighter than hunting bullets. If you're already doing that, you can also try a different powder.

But if it turns out neither group is a lot better than the other, you may still have the bedding and other issues affecting the gun. I think I would also look at trying front stock pressure points if the bedding issue didn't resolve.

You can also try a seating depth adjustment with the bullets. That's a good idea in any gun, but particularly if you have no way to measure runout of your finished loads. Some seating depths seem to allow a bullet to self-align better if they should happen to be tilted in the case neck, and if you aren't checking, they could be. In some guns that can make 2 moa of difference in final group size, though it often makes less; it's chamber dimension dependent. Just remember this adjustment is interactive with powder charge, so it is possible to move your barrel time off the sweet spot while doing it.

I've usually suggested adjusting seating depth using a lower power sweet spot load, one at least 10% below your normal charge weight, so it doesn't see excess pressure when you move the bullet in the lands and it doesn't disturb the gun as much as your full power loads do. Once you think you have it, you don't know if you've actually got the best seating depth or if you've just been tuning the barrel time. So, fine tune the powder charge again at the new seating depth, then fine tune the depth again afterward.

Those two follow-up tweaks should both need smaller numbers of shots and changes than the first round robin did. I would not expect your powder charge adjustment in the .308 to need to exceed a grain, or your final seating depth adjustment to exceed 0.030" if it changes at all. The idea is these iterations will hone in on the best seating depth and powder charge combination. Once you have that, go back to fine tune your normal power level sweet spot load using the new seating depth. Unless you've wound up seating into the lands, you won't expect it has changed by a large amount, either. If you do wind up seating into the lands for best accuracy, watch for pressure signs working up to the old load (always keep an eye out for them, but especially when you are in the lands, as that can raise pressure upwards of 20% or so).

With a good chronograph and Excel and QuickLOAD it is theoretically possible to work out a series of fewer test loads to get to the right result, and I've been experimenting a bit with that, but it's not ready for prime time. The bottom line is you can buy more toys and shorten range time, but the toys cost you time and money, so the idea it will save you something is dubious. It is more likely useful when you have very limited range access.

[browninghunter86]

I am using 165 Interlock BTSPs. Had tried SST originally but LGS was out last time I needed bullets. I am out so who knows what the store will have when I go to get some more today

If I am develping a hunting load to get the best results I should do that with the bullets I intend to use or prob in off season load match bullets to shoot?

[Unclenick]

You definitely want to develop hunting loads with the bullet you will hunt with, but if you want to know what the accuracy potential of the rifle is, match bullets are usually best. One exception that comes up occassionally is when you are only able to do the load development at 100 yards. Some of the match boattails need longer to go to sleep than that, so a flat base hunting bullet of the same weight will sometimes do better at 100 yards. By the time you get to 200 yards it is usually no longer true.

[browninghunter86]

Switched to Federal Brass and took bipod off

Will be loading 45.9, 46.1, 46.3 and 44.8 next

[browninghunter86]

Getting some good information from my reload groups. Here is the new load development in progress. Appears to me I should work with 46.1gr and play with seating depth?? I am wandering if it will tighten that group up some

Can anyone who uses OCW help out here

[Unclenick]

I would take a piece of tracing paper, mark it #1, and place it over bullseye #1 and mark the location of the aiming bullseye, then the center of each hole. Move it to the second bullseye and line the aim point marking up with it, then mark its hole's centers together with the first three centers you marked. Then do the same with the third target. You now have a single page with 9 hole marks superimposed to form a single 9-shot group.

Repeat the above with fresh sheets of paper, but with each starting one target further along the set. Thus the second sheet would be marked #2, and would start at bullseye 2, and record superimposed hole locations from 2, 3 and 4. The third sheet would start on target 3, and record superimposed holes from targets 3, 4 and 5, etcetera. In the end you'll have seven pages each with a 9-shot group on it. Look for the tightest group and its center (bullseye 2 load for the first page, bullseye 3 load for the second page, etc.) should be your load center.

[browninghunter86]

so for target 1 I connect each group or connect all the shot holes together? I did each target and the 9 holes with it but have not connected anything yet. Here is the picture tell me if I am doing this correctly




Group measurements(furthers shots of group)
#1-2.171"
#2-2.131"
#3-2.100"
#4-2.042"
#5-1.978"
#6-1.651"
#7-1.111"

[Unclenick]

Yep. That's what I'm talking about. Sure makes it clear that 46.5 grains is your best center load in the bunch. The oval shape of the group suggests the muzzle has vertical and horizontal deflection of close to the same magnitude, while the slant of the oval suggests they are not quite in phase as needed to make a circle. That deflection might be tightened by bedding. I don't recall where you left off with that part of the project.

Another thing that can cause a circular group in some chambers is bullets all seated tilted to about the same degree and going into the chamber around the clock in orientation. This is less likely than the deflection, and you'll need a runout gauge to check for it.

I don't doubt you noticed the group size trend is monotonic. That is, the groups get steadily smaller as the charge weight goes up, so it might be you'll get still smaller groups if you are able to go a couple more steps without getting pressure signs. Many benchrest shooters, in particular, have for years reported best accuracy just short of maximum in their gun, and you seem to be headed in that direction. QuickLOAD and Hodgdon both think you're at or above normal maximums now, but that's with default assumptions that may not reflect your gun's chamber well. Do you have any velocities?

Another possibility is to just assume the middle of that last group is as good as you'll get and that its 46.5 grain center is your best load, then start tuning seating depth, as you suggested earlier. Even if bullets are tilted, best seating depth seems to let them straighten out some.

[browninghunter86]

I do not have a way of checking velocities as of yet. Trying to find someone that has a chrony I can use.
We noticed pressure signs at 47.3gr(flattening of primer and bolt lift got harder.) Another thing I am going to see if it helps groups is I am using the FA digi scale to load and may not be giving me consistant loads from one cartridge to the next(thats why I have an RCBS 505 on its way). I may also not be the shooter to get same hole groups but I feel like my shooting has improved greatly over the last few months