6.5 Grendel Preferred Loads

[leopard6.5]

Hi Bob: In the article they were talking about a 123 gr. SST not the 129 gr. SST.

Do you think that would make much of a difference?

Lee

[stokesrj]

Yes, if it is designed with the same ogive as the 123 A-Max that could be a huge improvement. Strange, when I discussed this with them earlier this week and described what I was after they didn't mention a 123 SST and I would have expected them to. This may be worth following up.
Thanks for bringing it to my attention I read it as 129SST.
Bob

[LRRPF52]

I just got back from being at the range all day. I took the 123gr AMAX Hornady box ammo, and some 10-round batches of ladder tests with 129gr SST on top of CFE. I also shot some Precision Firearms 123gr Lapua Moly Scenar box ammo, which I love.

I did all my shooting at 200yds after confirming my zero at 50yds with 3 rounds. 123gr AMAX did great from my 16" AA button ER Shaw pipe. I got one 1.695" 4-round group at 200, and the rest were just over 2", with one rapid-fire group at 3.4", so I basically confirmed that the little 16" carbine is a great, lightweight hunting platform that will put the bullet on the money in the vital zone on-command, even when you throttle-up on the trigger.

That's funny about the 123gr SST because I was thinking, they need to make a 123gr SST for the Grendel. The 129gr SST eats too much case capacity, even loaded at 2.300".

My ladder tests with the 129 SST didn't show anything spectacular or striking to me, but the groups weren't terrible either. I got one at 4". one at 4.75", and one at 5.6". I think the 4" group was the heavier charges of 29.5gr-30.3gr. 29.9, 30.1, and 30.3gr were all compressed, even at 2.290" COAL.

My opinion on the 129gr SST is that it likes speed, so it will likely end up being loaded for my .260 Rem, which is a more appropriate case capacity for the 129gr SST profile all day long. I'll sling it at around 2800fps from the AR10 and use it as a target bullet, since I bought 600 of them.

[LR1955]

Here is what I'm thinking at this point. I would like us to settle on a handfull of candidate loads, maybe five or six. Define these loads in detail, and then as many of us as are willing agree to test them all and report in a standard format the results. RickOshay has volunteered to collect and format this data.

I realize not everyone has a chronograph, or even the facilities to conduct a controlled test, but many of us do. These tests will cost money, to do it right is probably more than a hundred bucks each unless we have all the components laying around. But if you are like me your going to be shooting something anyway and it might as well be a coordinated effort to discover what works best.

So far, it appears we have the following candidates;
1. Hornady 123 A-Max factory load
2. 100 A-Max Bwild load, 34 grains CFE223
3. 108 Scenar to be proposed by Bill
4. 120 SMK to be proposed by Gene
5. 123 A-Max 28.5 grains IMR8208XBR
6. Perhaps a 123A-max factory duplicate if I or we can figure out what that would be.

Once these tests are defined fully, it would be wise to back off and work up to each load to be safe. I know that some have reported high pressure signs on loads that are safe in my rifles. So it may not be possible to test these by simply loading and firing the matrix. But that in itself could be useful information.

What are the rest of you thinking? Is there a load that you think is a stronger candidate than the ones I have listed?

Bob

Bob:

OK -- with the 120 Sierra go with 30 grains of 2520 or 28 1/2 grains of 8208 XBR, CCI 450 and what Alexander states is his oal. Can't remember it off hand.

If someone shoots either of these two loads through a variety of barrels and barrel lengths from their little 14" carbines through 28 inch rifles; from the ER Shaws of the world through the Kriegers; polyginal or not; DI or gas piston system; at 200, 300 and 500yards which I believe represents about 99% of all shooters in terms of ranges; over a variety of environmental conditions; my bet is that either of these loads using the 120 Sierra will be more consistently accurate any other bullet / ammo combination fired from a gas blaster.

The problem will be you stating a metric from which one can make a rational and quantitative assessment. We are talking 'better' in terms of distance, barrels, rifling types, and environmental conditions.

LR1955

[stokesrj]

Bob:

OK -- with the 120 Sierra go with 30 grains of 2520 or 28 1/2 grains of 8208 XBR, CCI 450 and what Alexander states is his oal. Can't remember it off hand.
LR1955

The AA data is 2.220 COL

Quantitative is relative to the Hornady 123 A-Max factory load. That should equalize enviornmental conditions.

I don't see a problem with this in the High Power community, nearly evryone gets the same results with the 77 grain Sierra Match King, nearly evryone gets .5 -1.25MOA with Black Hills, Alanta Arms, or Federal Gold Medal Match or Hornady 75 BTHP Factory loads or equivalent handloads. Provided, they can shoot, no chrome bores, no slow twist, 1:8 or faster, doesn't matter 16" or 28".

Bob

[LR1955]

The AA data is 2.220 COL

Quantitative is relative to the Hornady 123 A-Max factory load. That should equalize enviornmental conditions.

I don't see a problem with this in the High Power community, nearly evryone gets the same results with the 77 grain Sierra Match King, nearly evryone gets .5 -1.25MOA with Black Hills, Alanta Arms, or Federal Gold Medal Match or Hornady 75 BTHP Factory loads or equivalent handloads. Provided, they can shoot, no chrome bores, no slow twist, 1:8 or faster, doesn't matter 16" or 28".

Bob

Bob:

Am ready to go.

Please send me 200 rounds of Hornady 123 A-Max cartridges. He, he, he.

Avoiding opinions is the key to success here.

So, what variables and factors are we supposed to use in our evaluation and as importantly, what statistic should be used?

LR1955

[stokesrj]

Bob:

Am ready to go.

Please send me 200 rounds of Hornady 123 A-Max cartridges. He, he, he.

Avoiding opinions is the key to success here.

So, what variables and factors are we supposed to use in our evaluation and as importantly, what statistic should be used?

LR1955

Okay, I'll email you 200 rounds
Bob

[bobke]

Kind of curious why Nosler 100/120 gr Ballistic Tips haven't shown up on the possibles list. Have had some very good results with TAC and 8208, as well as others I've seen post here, but they are pricey relative to 123 Amax. Other factor I seem to remember is that whatever you shoot behind Noslers will never group as well as the Noslers because of some softer copper wash left behind by the BT's. Any substance to same?

[bwaites]

I've shot tiny groups with the Noslers, but they are spendy....close to the same cost for 50 as for 100 of the Hornady's. They also lose on BC, especially beyond 300.

The problem is that they aren't cost effective for high volume shooting.

[PA_Allen]

Kind of curious why Nosler 100/120 gr Ballistic Tips haven't shown up on the possibles list. Have had some very good results with TAC and 8208, as well as others I've seen post here, but they are pricey relative to 123 Amax. Other factor I seem to remember is that whatever you shoot behind Noslers will never group as well as the Noslers because of some softer copper wash left behind by the BT's. Any substance to same?

I have been considering suggesting 30 gr of H335 or 8208 behind the 100 NBT or 100 TTSX as a lighter bullet "preferred load" that should perform well in a variety of rifles. I know several on this forum have found these loads to be sucessful. Granted you will loose the wind battle compared to the 120 gr class bullets, but they perform well out to at least 300-400 yds, which likely covers 95% of hunter's needs. I'm not sure the cost of the bullet should disqualify it from consideration. Cost is a factor for competition where you may be shooting thousands of rounds, but it is not as big of a factor for the average hunter/plinker.
Also, I have not had any trouble shooting other bullets after Noslers...I'm sure it just depends on you individual barrel's personality.
Thanks Bob for this thread. I think we will all learn a lot.
Best,
PA

[stokesrj]

Actually I was just waiting for some one to suggest the Nosler BT's I've had very good results with the 100 NBT and 120 NBT but that was long ago and I have misplaced my data. So, if I were to add these to our list, what specific loads would you propose?
Bob

[bobke]

From memory, without logs in front of me, 29.5 TAC with 100 gr BT and 28.0 8208 were both very good. Will submit chrono data when I can catch up to my records, which are at an alternate location. They stick with me because of bug hole like accuracy. Lapua brass, RP 7 1/2 primers, trimmed 1.515, seated just short of lands.

[PA_Allen]

Actually I was just waiting for some one to suggest the Nosler BT's I've had very good results with the 100 NBT and 120 NBT but that was long ago and I have misplaced my data. So, if I were to add these to our list, what specific loads would you propose?
Bob

Bob,
I would suggest the following.
Lapua or Hornady Brass and Rem 7.5 primers. Velocitiy listed for 20" LW barrel.

120 gr. Nosler Ballistic TipXBR 8208100 gr. Nosler Ballistic TipXBR 8208H335

[seatleroadwr]

Nosler 120 grain boat tails seem to shoot well with about any powder charge I try. They rarely produce over a 3/4" group at 100 yds for me. The last trial I had with them used the following receipe 31.5 grains of leverevolution, CCI 450 primers, COL 2.274, FPS=2570 with a 22 inch barrel.

[Dogue]

Bob,
I would suggest the following.
Lapua or Hornady Brass and Rem 7.5 primers. Velocitiy listed for 20" LW barrel.

120 gr. Nosler Ballistic Tip – Overall Cartridge length = 2.225”

XBR 8208
28.0 gr – 2515fps,

Best,
PA

I found similar results from my 18" Shaw barrel with that load using CCI41's
2522 fps, SD 6.0, ES 14

One of the 120 NBT loads from the old forum that my rifle liked but may be pushing the pressure limits was 31.0g of W748.

I'm able to load them at 2.250 without touching the lands