Quickload help

Justice1327

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2021
Messages
2,590
Location
USA
I need some assistance from someone who is familiar with quick load. A friend of mine has a factory .243 Win model 70 receiver with a 22" Shilen match grade barrel, 1:10 twist, that I pillar bedded in a wood stock. His original plan was to load 65 grain VMAX and shoot coyotes. After I develop a load and seating depth it shot easily into half-inch groups and he was happy. However, when he came out to my place to do some longer range shooting he realized that it may not be a 600 yard or further gun with that bullet. (He got the long range bug) So he bought some 87 gr VMAX and 90 gr ELDX. I could not find a good node using the H4895 we used for 65 grain VMAX. With the shortage of components we could only find a few powders that might work. 6.5 staball and IMR 4451 and H4831. We found a small node with the 4831 after switching to CCI primers from his WLR. However with the expected rain over the next couple of days we cannot shoot groups with it.

This leads me to my need of assistance. I cannot find anything from a legitimate source using 6.5 staball or IMR 4451for the desired combo of using these pwdrs with a 87 or 90 gr bullets.

I am willing to pay if someone can take the time to give me an idea of what the loads might be for this combo. I understand that the 6Creed is ~ 4gr less holding capacity of the .243, but we dont have the abundance of components to work up as one might normally do when testing. I am not all that familiar with QL, but believe it may assist me in narrowing done the load.

In addition to the two powders, I have Remington brass, with WLR & CCI primers (also have in LRMag). 87Vmax and 90 ELDX.

Thank you

Just for reference attached is the load for the 65gr
 

Attachments

  • 39CF03EA-BD5D-45F7-80C9-7011C0AC6199.png
    39CF03EA-BD5D-45F7-80C9-7011C0AC6199.png
    88.1 KB · Views: 126
  • 62617775-CAED-4A37-BC34-6F424A8D7081.png
    62617775-CAED-4A37-BC34-6F424A8D7081.png
    94.5 KB · Views: 113
Last edited:
I've got a copy of QL, but it's on my computer at home and I am on vacation.

I've had great luck with it matching very closely with 25-06, 270 Win, 30-06, 30-30, and 6.5 CM.

However, something doesn't seemed to be computing right in the software for 243 Win. Velocities were way off, using known powder burn rates of various powders. Therefore, if you go down this route - proceed with caution.
 
From the Hodgdon 2019 Basic Reloading Manual.

Not an exact match to you bullet weights, but at least a reference point for a few powders you listed with 100gr bullets. Charges listed are max.
 

Attachments

  • AAE41873-1093-4C27-8100-1B1E01D062C2.png
    AAE41873-1093-4C27-8100-1B1E01D062C2.png
    71.8 KB · Views: 99
QL data attached. I assumed a 24" barrel.
 

Attachments

  • 243 Win 87 Vmax IMR 4451.txt
    2.4 KB · Views: 146
  • 243 Win 87 Vmax StaBALL 6.5.txt
    2.4 KB · Views: 115
  • 243 Win 90 ELDX IMR 4451.txt
    2.4 KB · Views: 93
  • 243 Win 90 ELDX StaBALL 6.5.txt
    2.4 KB · Views: 94
From the Hodgdon 2019 Basic Reloading Manual.

Not an exact match to you bullet weights, but at least a reference point for a few powders you listed with 100gr bullets. Charges listed are max.
Yes thank you, I have several books, but just not with those bullets and pwdrs. Trying to save where I can and limit the experimentation.
 
This is not an answer to your question, but what is the twist rate for the barrel? The longer/heavier bullets may need a faster twist, and the 243 traditionally have only a 1:10 twist. For a 90gn bullet, 1:10 may be marginal.
Good catch, updated now.Thank you
One reason I want higher velocity , because as you mentioned it is slightly marginal.
 
Here is what I got off IMR reloading site with 4451. Be careful and the standard "Always start 10% below max and work up to it" statement applies.

View attachment 261121
Yes I saw that. Thank you. I just wasn't sure if that first bullet listed was a monolithic bullet and the extra bearing surface would impact the pressure.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 4 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.
Top