• Hey All! Lately there has been more and more scammers on the forum board. They register and replies to members requests for guns and/or parts or other things. The reply contains a gmail or hotmail address or similar ”anonymous” email addresses which they want you to reply to. DO NOT ANSWER ANY STRANGE MESSAGES! They often state something like this: ”Hello! Saw your post about purchasing a stock for a Safari. KnuckleheadBob has one. Email him at: [email protected]” If you receive any strange messages: Check the status of whoever message you. If they have no posts and signed up the same day or very recently, stay away. Same goes for other members they might refer to. Check them too and if they are long standing members, PM them and ask if the message is legit. Most likely it’s not. Then use the report function in each message or post so I can kick them out! Beware of anything that might seem fishy! And again, for all of you who registered your personal name as username, please contact me so I can change it to a more anonymous username. You’d be surprised of how much one can find out about a person from just a username on a forum such ad our! All the best! And be safe! Jim

Do you chronograph your hunting loads?

Sako Collectors Club Discussion Forum

Individual barrels in a given caliber will vary significantly in bore diameter, length of throat, roughness, depth of grooves, and size of chamber. Sometimes this variance is so significant that a somewhat longer barrel will be slower than a shorter barrel with an identical load.

This difference, when commercial rifles are compared to the test barrels which are used to develop data by powder and bullet companies, is usually even more apparent. Test barrels are purposely made with minimum dimension chambers, minimal throats, and slick bores -- all of which is intended to keep their "maximum" loads under SAAMI standardized pressures when fired in barrels of unknown characteristics. And which usually achieve greater velocities than when fired in commercial barrels (of similar length).

When a given barrel starts out at, say, 26 inches, and is cut one inch and a time and chronographed after each cut, you can see the somewhat linear progression in velocities which is expected. But comparing a Winchester 22" .30-06 barrel to a Savage 24" .30-06 barrel will not necessarily tell you much about the effect of barrel length.

Another variable: Powder lots can and do vary, sometimes significantly (certain brands and types are particularly subject to lot-to-lot variations.) Also, the moisture content of the powder, which can actually vary from day to day, will have an effect (if only a small one) on the energy content of a give mass of powder, and therefore on pressure and velocity. "Duplicating" a load from a loading manual isn't as easy as it might sound; duplicating the performance of a load from a manual is even more elusive.
 
One thing I'm enjoying is combining quickload and the chronograph data. It certainly makes it easy to work up loads. I just wish quickload would get ported to an ipad type APP. It looks like it was programmed for windows 3.11!

Have you found that Quickload results for ADI AR2209 powder are erratic?

Hodgdon H4350 is supposed to be identical to AR2209, being manufactured for Hodgdon by ADI, yet the propellant properties for AR2209 in Quickload are not the same as those listed for H4350. All other ADI/Hodgdon equivalent powders have identical Quickload values. (eg AR2208/Varget, AR2213SC/H4831SC, AR2206H/H4895). Seems a bit strange, especially as Hodgdon and ADI data in their reloading manuals are identical.

I find I get better results ignoring the AR2209 data and using the H4350 data.

Incidentally do you combine Quickload with OCW (optimal charge weight) barrel times to predict loads? In many cases I have found these predicted loads to be uncannily close to the optimum. And, sadly, in other cases not!

The great thing about Quickload is that you can "burn" lots of different powder/projectile combinations without spending a cent or blowing up your rifle! And, BTW, Windows 3.1 is a lot better than DOS which I started out with!

Will report on the superchrono after a bit more use. - David
 
if not, do you believe your rifle is getting the published velocity?
Yes, and hell no. Have chronographed triple digit number of guns. Seldom have I seen a factory gun reach load manual specs. Usually they only will if:
manual used test rifle not test barrel
Manual used shorter barrel than the one you have
Premium quality gun(sako can fall into this)
Running grains more than what they are
Have a custom barrel on the gun
You gun has more throat than reload manual test gun, you have your bullets seated out farther so you can run more charge powder

Most Factory barrels are not tight enough to match a test barrel. Not always, but more than not.

Chrono for hunting. Need increases the further you go, especially if using turret scope. Also depends on caliber. My 257 WTBY at 3750 FPS lot less need out to 400-500 yards than 308 WIN lobbing 180's at same range. definetley not needed 300 yards or less unless you like popping them in the head ever shot.
 
I have and probably will, but the reality is it ain't necessary. If you know where your rifle will print at a specific range, you ought to be good.

A couple hundred FPS ain't gonna matter if you know where your bullets print. An elk ain't gonna know what killed it. Elk don't know the difference between a 308 Win and a .300 RUM.

I keep reading stories of ultra-long-range shooting. I don't know where those ultra-long-range shooters are, but I ain't even run across such a fella at Rocky mountain altitude. The environmental realities of hunting the Rockies just about eliminates ultra-long-range shooting. Besides, I'd rather shoot big game at a hundred yards than farther.
 
Interesting thread. I realize it's older but I'll revive it. I chrono my loads. Velocity isn't a big deal to me. The number I'm usually most interested in is the standard deviation. It's no surprise to me that the best shooting loads I've worked up, typically exhibit little velocity deviation from shot to shot.

As far as velocity figures go I rarely achieve published velocities out of any of my rifles, even on rifles that have the same barrel length as the test gun used by the publisher. No surprise though. This is in line with the experiences of most other reloaders I've had this discussion with. The one exception I have in my modest collection is a TC Icon in .270 with a 24 inch barrel. This particular firearm is interesting because actual velocities run a bit higher than the published data. It's internal dimensions must be the answer although I've never had it checked. No need to really. I've worked with this gun carefully and have never experienced any signs of abnormal pressure, so I just happily feed the laser beam the load that it wants.
 
The one exception I have in my modest collection is a TC Icon in .270 with a 24 inch barrel. This particular firearm is interesting because actual velocities run a bit higher than the published data.
If you mess with enough rifles you'll eventually find a few with "fast barrels" (or whatever is the cause of higher than expected velocities.) My most notable "fast barrel" rifle is also a .270, but a Sako Finnbear. It won't accept charges as high as most loading manuals list, but gets 100 more FPS with about 3% less powder than the listed loads. It is also razor's-edge accurate. Needless to say, this one is a keeper.
 
If you mess with enough rifles you'll eventually find a few with "fast barrels" (or whatever is the cause of higher than expected velocities.) My most notable "fast barrel" rifle is also a .270, but a Sako Finnbear. It won't accept charges as high as most loading manuals list, but gets 100 more FPS with about 3% less powder than the listed loads. It is also razor's-edge accurate. Needless to say, this one is a keeper.

100 FPS is considerable over published data considering that the book data is generally never attained in the first place. On the .270 I referenced above, I ended up with a 3214 average on 5 shots through the chronograph using a 62.0 grains of H 4831 short cut and 130 grain Hornady SST's. Keep in mind this is a max load per the Hornady book. No matter what book I rerefenced there are no 130 grain bullet and powder combinations that should produce 3200 FPS but this gun does it. The interesting thing from my perspective is that I have never, ever used max loads in the 25+ years of reloading except on this particular firearm. I ended up there because the gun told me to do it. As I worked up the ladder, the groups kept getting smaller. That is fairly common in my experience, but on other firearms I've generally found a sweet spot somewhere well below max. Needless to say, I only hunt with this round. No sense beating up my gun when I'm fooling around at the range.

At the other end of the spectrum, is a load I developed for a friend who shoots a Browning 7mm-08. That gun will consistently print 5 shot groups about the size of a dime using 145 grain Speer boattails and a minimum charge of IMR 4350. I told him he's handicapping that fine 7mm rifle using that load because it is slow as can be, but it's hard to argue with accuracy so he's happily killed deer with it for 20 odd years now.
 
Last edited:
Hello Jimmymac,
Never say never! I have load data from the late 80's I used to push a 130 grain Nosler Ballistic Tip to 3213 FPS. 58 Gr's of H-4831 with a CCI 250 Primer, shooting a 22" barrel Winchester Model 70 in .270. Also, I worked-up my own load and was pushing the same Nosler BT to an average of 3001 FPS (6 shots) with 60 gr's of H-4821, CCI 250 primer, shooting an 18 1/2 inch barrel H&R 301 Mannlicher in .270. I used an Oehler #33 Chrono at approx. 10 feet from the muzzle. Both produced 3 round 1" groups at 125 yards. I did end up toning down the H&R Mannlicher, due to blowing out primers and case expansion causing difficult shell extraction. Thank god for the super strong SAKO action! Also, reloading books/manuals will never exceed manufacturer's maximum chamber pressure, for obvious reasons. Carl
 
Hello Jimmymac,
Never say never! I have load data from the late 80's I used to push a 130 grain Nosler Ballistic Tip to 3213 FPS. 58 Gr's of H-4831 with a CCI 250 Primer, shooting a 22" barrel Winchester Model 70 in .270. Also, I worked-up my own load and was pushing the same Nosler BT to an average of 3001 FPS (6 shots) with 60 gr's of H-4821, CCI 250 primer, shooting an 18 1/2 inch barrel H&R 301 Mannlicher in .270. I used an Oehler #33 Chrono at approx. 10 feet from the muzzle. Both produced 3 round 1" groups at 125 yards. I did end up toning down the H&R Mannlicher, due to blowing out primers and case expansion causing difficult shell extraction. Thank god for the super strong SAKO action! Also, reloading books/manuals will never exceed manufacturer's maximum chamber pressure, for obvious reasons. Carl


Wow! 3213 w/ 58 grains of H4831 is pretty much unheard of out of a 22" tube. The 3001 out of an 18 1/2" barrel w/60 grains is equally ludicrous if not more so. Those numbers well exceed book data I've read from any era including some old books from the 70's and 80's. Good for you if you were able to get that kind of performance! It's shocking to me because those velocities are significantly out of the norm considering both guns have shorter tubes than the typical test gun. My experience has been at the opposite end of the spectrum. I typically see my loads fall below published data at any given powder charge and bullet weight no matter what gun I happen to be loading for.

I certainly hope you kept both of those guns if they could perform like that. I know I'll be keeping the oddity that I have. That is laser beam stuff without being a magnum caliber. Good medicine for hunting over fields or open country. Thanks for relaying your experience with the .270.
 
I chrono every hunting load for each of my rifles.
I do this for the simple reason as the gun will tell you what speed or speeds it likes for a particular weight bullet.
Once I determine the speed window for the first and second node then I refine the load for the particular bullet to achieve maximum terminal performance.
The SD's will fall in line and I have a load that will shoot sub moa with most being in the sub .5 range and have extreme performance at the terminal end.
 
Back
Top