Elite Ammunition 98 grain solids. Load data and BC?

[MrSurgicalPrecision]

http://www.eliteammunition.net/catalog/item/7440165/8334522.htm

Well thanks to LRRPF2 I had to order a couple boxes of these. Thanks buddy!:p Now I'm looking for some good loads and possibly some ballpark BCs. I have a 24" barrel. Any help would be greatly appreciated. I know loading solids is not like loading traditional lead core bullets. I haven't got the foggiest idea on what the BC would be.

I emailed Elite Ammunition as well so I'll share the email with you guys if they answer.

Cheers
_MSP

[MrSurgicalPrecision]

The reply to my email:

Brandon
Our insurance does not cover us publishing load data.

I can tell you the bullet is light for size. Start with the load data for the 120gr TSX bullet.

Due to it extreme tail stabilizing the the air behind the bullet, and light weight for size, the BC is around 480

[bwaites]

If the BC is close to .480 (I'm doubtful, but hopeful!), and you can push this sucker hard, I could approach 2925 FPS from a 28" barrel.

Calculated Table
Range Drop Drop Windage Windage Velocity Mach Energy Time Lead Lead
(yd) (in) (MOA) (in) (MOA) (ft/s) (none) (ft•lbs) (s) (in) (MOA)
0 -2.5 *** 0.0 *** 2931.8 2.626 1870.0 0.000 0.0 ***
100 -0.0 -0.0 0.7 0.6 2733.5 2.448 1625.7 0.106 18.7 17.8
200 -2.2 -1.0 2.8 1.3 2543.9 2.279 1407.9 0.220 38.7 18.5
300 -9.7 -3.1 6.5 2.1 2362.0 2.116 1213.8 0.342 60.2 19.2
400 -23.5 -5.6 11.9 2.8 2187.6 1.959 1041.2 0.474 83.4 19.9
500 -44.5 -8.5 19.3 3.7 2020.6 1.810 888.3 0.617 108.6 20.7
600 -74.1 -11.8 29.0 4.6 1861.5 1.667 753.9 0.772 135.8 21.6
700 -113.8 -15.5 41.1 5.6 1710.9 1.532 636.9 0.940 165.4 22.6
800 -165.4 -19.7 56.0 6.7 1570.1 1.406 536.4 1.123 197.6 23.6
900 -231.0 -24.5 74.0 7.9 1440.6 1.290 451.5 1.322 232.7 24.7
1000 -313.5 -29.9 95.3 9.1 1324.1 1.186 381.5 1.540 271.0 25.9
1100 -415.9 -36.1 120.2 10.4 1222.8 1.095 325.3 1.776 312.5 27.1
1200 -541.5 -43.1 148.6 11.8 1138.9 1.020 282.2 2.030 357.4 28.4
1300 -693.9 -51.0 180.4 13.3 1072.3 0.960 250.2 2.302 405.2 29.8
1400 -876.6 -59.8 215.2 14.7 1019.7 0.913 226.2 2.590 455.8 31.1
1500 -1092.8 -69.6 252.8 16.1 976.7 0.875 207.5 2.891 508.9 32.4

22/06/11 14:48, JBM/jbmtraj_drift-5.1.cgi

That's significantly less drop and drift than the 123 Sierra at 2700 FPS.

However, solid bullets have a habit of causing higher pressures than lead core bullets, (less "squish" in the bore, I think) even with less engagement surface in the lands. That probably screws with the possible velocities.

[MrSurgicalPrecision]

If the BC is close to .480 (I'm doubtful, but hopeful!), and you can push this sucker hard, I could approach 2925 FPS from a 28" barrel.

Calculated Table
Range Drop Drop Windage Windage Velocity Mach Energy Time Lead Lead
(yd) (in) (MOA) (in) (MOA) (ft/s) (none) (ft•lbs) (s) (in) (MOA)
0 -2.5 *** 0.0 *** 2931.8 2.626 1870.0 0.000 0.0 ***
100 -0.0 -0.0 0.7 0.6 2733.5 2.448 1625.7 0.106 18.7 17.8
200 -2.2 -1.0 2.8 1.3 2543.9 2.279 1407.9 0.220 38.7 18.5
300 -9.7 -3.1 6.5 2.1 2362.0 2.116 1213.8 0.342 60.2 19.2
400 -23.5 -5.6 11.9 2.8 2187.6 1.959 1041.2 0.474 83.4 19.9
500 -44.5 -8.5 19.3 3.7 2020.6 1.810 888.3 0.617 108.6 20.7
600 -74.1 -11.8 29.0 4.6 1861.5 1.667 753.9 0.772 135.8 21.6
700 -113.8 -15.5 41.1 5.6 1710.9 1.532 636.9 0.940 165.4 22.6
800 -165.4 -19.7 56.0 6.7 1570.1 1.406 536.4 1.123 197.6 23.6
900 -231.0 -24.5 74.0 7.9 1440.6 1.290 451.5 1.322 232.7 24.7
1000 -313.5 -29.9 95.3 9.1 1324.1 1.186 381.5 1.540 271.0 25.9
1100 -415.9 -36.1 120.2 10.4 1222.8 1.095 325.3 1.776 312.5 27.1
1200 -541.5 -43.1 148.6 11.8 1138.9 1.020 282.2 2.030 357.4 28.4
1300 -693.9 -51.0 180.4 13.3 1072.3 0.960 250.2 2.302 405.2 29.8
1400 -876.6 -59.8 215.2 14.7 1019.7 0.913 226.2 2.590 455.8 31.1
1500 -1092.8 -69.6 252.8 16.1 976.7 0.875 207.5 2.891 508.9 32.4

22/06/11 14:48, JBM/jbmtraj_drift-5.1.cgi

That's significantly less drop and drift than the 123 Sierra at 2700 FPS.

However, solid bullets have a habit of causing higher pressures than lead core bullets, (less "squish" in the bore, I think) even with less engagement surface in the lands. That probably screws with the possible velocities.

Put that chart in mils man! I'm horrible at those conversions. LOL just kidding man. Thanks for the info.

Stanc,

I'm pretty sure they're very optimistic about their BC. I'm going to have to try these 100 yards (or even 50) at a time past 500 i guess. I was just talking to LRRPF2 and they sent him the 6.8 SPC bullets by mistke. He weighed them and saw big differences in the weight ranging from 76.1 to 77.6 grains.

I'll do a video on them when they come in. I'll weigh them, shoot them, and then shoot them at longer ranges if I can get them to group up.

[LR1955]

Put that chart in mils man! I'm horrible at those conversions. LOL just kidding man. Thanks for the info.

Stanc,

I'm pretty sure they're very optimistic about their BC. I'm going to have to try these 100 yards (or even 50) at a time past 500 i guess. I was just talking to LRRPF2 and they sent him the 6.8 SPC bullets by mistke. He weighed them and saw big differences in the weight ranging from 76.1 to 77.6 grains.

I'll do a video on them when they come in. I'll weigh them, shoot them, and then shoot them at longer ranges if I can get them to group up.

MSP:

FWIW, you won't notice a difference between a bullet of .48 and .46 BC's. Also, I wouldn't get too hung up on a 100 grain bullet varying in weight by a grain or two although it isn't something that a bullet maker wants to happen.

What you want to look at is that the bullets are identical in size with emphasis on the part of the bullet consisting of the majority of the ogive through the tail. You can take some hits in terms of how sharp a tip is but if the bullets vary in where the ogive is, you will have problems at distances from about 300 and farther.

LR1955

[warped]

He weighed them and saw big differences in the weight ranging from 76.1 to 77.6 grains.



Good god, that does not fill me with enthusiasm:(

My point being that does not look like an ideal amount of QC, not exactly Six Sigma going on there.

[LRRPF52]

Yeah,

I weighed a bunch of Lapua 123gr Scenars, just to re-check my sanity, and they only had a spread of .2 grains in weight variance. The 6.8 SPC 77gr solids varied quite a bit. I'm not sure what advantage one would gain with them in that caliber. I was thinking of seeing what type of close-range carnage I could inflict with them in my .270 Winchester, but I'm sending them back. 3100 fps with 130gr is plenty for me in the .270 Winchester.

LRRPF52

[LR1955]

Yeah,

I weighed a bunch of Lapua 123gr Scenars, just to re-check my sanity, and they only had a spread of .2 grains in weight variance. The 6.8 SPC 77gr solids varied quite a bit. I'm not sure what advantage one would gain with them in that caliber. I was thinking of seeing what type of close-range carnage I could inflict with them in my .270 Winchester, but I'm sending them back. 3100 fps with 130gr is plenty for me in the .270 Winchester.

LRRPF52

LR52:

You won't find too much spread with lead core bullets. Solids are another matter.

I am just not sure it will mean anything in practical terms unless the bullets are also off balance.

LR1955

[MrSurgicalPrecision]

LR52:

You won't find too much spread with lead core bullets. Solids are another matter.

I am just not sure it will mean anything in practical terms unless the bullets are also off balance.

LR1955

Thanks for the info LR. Insightful as always. I guess I'll do my measurements with a set of dial calipers instead of a scale. I really want these bullets to be good shooters. You helped me regain my confidence in them, and I know if I think a load is going to be crap it's going to be crap regardless of wether it really is or not. Psychological effect and all that.

[MrSurgicalPrecision]

Update:

Got these in the other day. I measured for length and weight. Out of 10 samples I saw a 0.004" variation and a weight variation of 0.3 grains. Majority were 1.335" overall length and 98.0 grains on the money.

I shot them today with some loads worked up using Accurate 2520. Loads ranged from 28.0 to 31.0 grains. The best load I found was 30.5 grains followed by 30.0 grains. The other loads were absolutely horrible, but seemed to get better as the charge went up until i hit 31 grains where it opened back up again. I had one called low flier with the 30.5 grain load. I'm shooting a 24" Sabre Defence barrel with a 1-9" twist.

I'm going to give TAC a try next and see what happens. I may also look into some LeverEvolution loads.

The two groups below were both shot today. The first one (in the dot) is the EA 98 gr solids. The second is Hornady factory ammo. That should give you a good idea of both the ability of my rifle and the shooter. Keep in mind the low shot was a called flier, shooter error.

[bwaites]

Pictures aren't working for me.

[MrSurgicalPrecision]

Pictures aren't working for me.

That's 'cause I'm part 'tarded. I got em now.

[bwaites]

Nice shooting. Any velocities?

How about at 600+ yards?

[MrSurgicalPrecision]

No, didn't have any time to go borrow my buddy's chrono. I just got the bullets in on Tuesday and started load developement. So far I've shot 5 different charges of 2520. They varied from around 3 inches @ 100 to the group in the pic. They seem pretty finicky on velocity or charge density to me so far. I'll get some TAC rounds worked up and try them by the end of the weekend.

[rasp65]

155 wants to know if that is a regulation dime in the photos. You might want to try something like H335.

[LRRPF52]

Roger that, I think you're using those gumball machine plastic dimes on us to look cool, dude. I bet you have a gag shop tape measure too, Mr. Perfect Shot! Hee-hee...

[MrSurgicalPrecision]

155 wants to know if that is a regulation dime in the photos. You might want to try something like H335.
I couldn't find any nickels, all I had was dimes man!

[MrSurgicalPrecision]

Chrony data!

All loads used Hornady brass and CCI 450 primers unless noted

28.5 gr TAC
Lo-2641
Hi-2678
Ave-2658
Ex Spread-36.8
Std Dev-13.8
Unacceptable grouping

29.0 gr TAC
Lo-2687
Hi-2721
Ave-2705
Ex Spread-34.4
Std Dev-14.5
Unacceptable grouping

30.0 gr TAC
Lo-2771
Hi-2804
Ave-2794
Ex Spread-32.7
Std Dev-13.2
Unacceptable grouping, showed mild flattening of the primer.

31.4 gr LeverEvolution (CCI 400 primer)
Lo-2795
Hi-2809
Ave-2801
Ex Spread-13.6
Std Dev-6.0
(Only had 4 rounds to test) Best grouping so far. 4 shots around an inch with 3 touching. Showed some flattening of the primer. Showing potential.

[bwaites]

OK guys, this is beginning to get very serious.

The ATF has raided Elite Ammunition and told them that their solid bullets are not ATF compliant, as .223, 6.5, and 6.8 are now considered pistol cartridges. As such, their solid bullets are considered AP and have been removed from the market.

http://www.eliteammunition.net/newsletters/newsletter/7385257/81014.htm

So we now have a situation where we are told we must hunt with a bullet that is not lead based, but the most reliable method to manufacture that type of bullet is no longer allowed.

Anyone else see any problem with this?

[BjornF16]

I suspect this is part of this administrations' new "safety rules" for firearms that will be rolled out over the next few weeks...legislating by fiat

[Variable]

OK guys, this is beginning to get very serious.

The ATF has raided Elite Ammunition and told them that their solid bullets are not ATF compliant, as .223, 6.5, and 6.8 are now considered pistol cartridges. As such, their solid bullets are considered AP and have been removed from the market.

http://www.eliteammunition.net/newsletters/newsletter/7385257/81014.htm

So we now have a situation where we are told we must hunt with a bullet that is not lead based, but the most reliable method to manufacture that type of bullet is no longer allowed.

Anyone else see any problem with this?
AAAAAGGGGGHHHHHHHH!!!!!!:mad:

Now, you see why I have been staying off the internet!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!? I hop on here for a couple of minutes, and blammo my head explodes! Gahhh! Just tell me where to show up when the party starts. I can't take reading this stuff anymore!!!:mad::mad::mad:

[JASmith]

I wonder if this is one of the first steps the current administration is taking to make shooting safer?

The question is, for whom?

The real dilemma is that almost every rifle cartridge of less than 8mm has been put into a pistol format at one time or another. Most of the smaller rifle cartridges in the larger calibers have also.

Looks like the courts and lawyers will get more $$$...

[LRRPF52]

OK guys, this is beginning to get very serious.

The ATF has raided Elite Ammunition and told them that their solid bullets are not ATF compliant, as .223, 6.5, and 6.8 are now considered pistol cartridges. As such, their solid bullets are considered AP and have been removed from the market.

http://www.eliteammunition.net/newsletters/newsletter/7385257/81014.htm

So we now have a situation where we are told we must hunt with a bullet that is not lead based, but the most reliable method to manufacture that type of bullet is no longer allowed.

Anyone else see any problem with this?

There's something funky going on here. Since when were .223, 6.5, and 6.8 hunting calibers? Are they basing this loose definition of what you can chamber an XP-100 for? That would include a lot of other calibers as well.

[z06man]

If you add the Contender, pretty much no rifle caliber is exempt.

[JASmith]

Bill,

Have you been following the NSSF newsletters or the NRA "Grass Roots" alerts?

While you are absolutely correct that more may be going on than reported by the raided party, the statement is consistent with action expected by reports in these media.

Consider that the administration has tasked a known rabid antigunner with "improving the safety of firearms in the US." Further, NSSF reports that the task force is meeting with all stakeholders, yet the only stakeholder mentioned is the Brady foundation.

Hence my earlier comment -- the courts and lawyers are going to get more $$$...

Sign me today as "Waiting for the Other Shoe."

[bwaites]

Bill,

Have you been following the NSSF newsletters or the NRA "Grass Roots" alerts?

While you are absolutely correct that more may be going on than reported by the raided party, the statement is consistent with action expected by reports in these media.

Consider that the administration has tasked a known rabid antigunner with "improving the safety of firearms in the US." Further, NSSF reports that the task force is meeting with all stakeholders, yet the only stakeholder mentioned is the Brady foundation.

Hence my earlier comment -- the courts and lawyers are going to get more $$$...

Sign me today as "Waiting for the Other Shoe."

Yes, to both. There are multiple gilding metal bullets, including the Barnes banded solids, Nosler offerings, and I believe even some Hornadys. Elite is tiny, so I wonder if they are "the canary in the coal mine" test case.

[JASmith]

It's also true that individuals and small businesses can't afford the up-front costs of litigation, even for slam-dunk cases. That's part of the reason Wal-Mart fought so hard to keep the sex-discrimination case from becoming class-action.

Most us and small businesses are lucky to cough up a retainer fee for a lawyer found in the telephone book. It takes literally millions of dollars to fight the government and the NGOs supporting their positions.

Also, don't forget that maneuvering is underway to stigmatize the ownership of firearms. It's part of why the open carry movements are having such trouble. As soon as we allow ourselves to say it's OK for a permitted license-holder to carry concealed, but he or she is not permitted to let the firearm to be seen by others in public, we know that stigmatization is underway.

All this means that we may have to make even more donations of time and money to help protect our rights.

[MrSurgicalPrecision]

I'm just mad as can be right now. I've already sunk a lot of time and effort into this load developement. Now it's for nothing really, I've got 50 bullets left and I can't get anymore. I wonder if the ATF is going to kick my door in wanting my unfired rounds?

[JASmith]

I...I wonder if the ATF is going to kick my door in wanting my unfired rounds?
I can't predict the method of entry, but the EA web page indicates that the ATF will contact you to recover any unfired rounds.

[ss355]

I thought that this type of regulation applied to loaded ammo, not components. Either way, nothing regarding the BATF surprises me any longer.

[RangerRick]

Or AA 2460, it's great for the lighter bullets.

[z06man]

Very confusing, but worth watching.