225 eldm

[Trnelson]

I received 200 of the new(ish) 225g ELDM bullets yesterday from the dude in the brown truck. I started by randomly selecting 30 bullets (15 from each box of 100) and weighing them. I am not thrilled with what I am seeing. I was not believing what the scale was telling me so I set up my beam scale, re-calibrated my digital scale and double checked both with my check weight before I verified that my scales were bang on and verified my primary findings on all 30 samples.
I then weighed all 200 and sorted them into .1g groups. Lightest bullet was 224.3g and the heaviest was 225.2g. The most fell between 224.4g and 224.6g with a total of 70 specimens in that range and no individual weight having more than 29 examples.
I have not yet checked base to ogive measurements or diameters but I intend to check both at this point. Do I have a bad lot? Are these outliers? Both boxes came from Lot# 2170060
What are you seeing in yours?

 

[Barrelnut]

Haven't sorted ELDM stuff, but have sorted lots of 208 A-MAX and they sorted about the same. Bearing surfaces will probably have more variance than you might expect too.

The Hornady bullets just have more variance than Bergers.

Most guys on here say that sorting bullets is a huge waste of time and the only difference it makes is in your head. I think if they sorted some Hornady's they might change their mind.

 

[Trnelson]

Exactly. I would think match bullets would have better comsistency. I load quite a few Lapua Scenar and Berger tactical bullets and have never encountered that much variation, even switching lots.
I am finishing off a 264 win mag and one of my 6.5/06 with 500 of the 142.4g - 144.1g ELDX from lot #2151980. I gave everything 142.9g and lighter to my 6.5/06 and the rest to my 264. Nothing quite like re-doing your load work up every time I switch from one group to the next and attempt to stay on the accuracy node. When I'm On it they will shoot .3 MOA, but **** the copper fouling.
One of my 30/338 win mag rifles is getting up there in round count so I thought I'd try these 225 ELDM and compare it to what I've been getting with the 230 Berger tactical before the barrel gets changed out.
I'll report back what I find. Maybe I'm just getting all puffy over nothing. Two of my good friends shoot the 140 ELDM in their Creedmoors .6 MOA in hornady precision match ammo. Maybe they sort all the good stuff for their ammo and send the rest out to us schlubs. I shall see soon enough.

 

[Barrelnut]

Yea, I got a box of the 178 ELDX recently. Thought they might be a good replacement for Nosler AB and BT in a 300 WSM. Then I start seeing all of the reports of copper fouling with them...

 

[Trnelson]

I loaded seven of the 224.4g lot that had the same bearing surface dimension of '225 ELDM' bullets to test preliminarily. I am going to find the POI and basic velocity over the magnetospeed at 100 to see where these are at and start fouling in the barrel. After seeing what this brief session yields I will tweak the powder charge, possibly seating depth for a subsequent test. I may also chronical a couple of primer changes if something shows some promise.
I loaded into 3x fired, freshly annealed, fully prepared neck sized 234.8g brass
Winchester large rifle magnum primers
Norma 217 powder (what I bave used in this rifle)
Rifle is a 26" barreled 10 twist 30/338 win mag with 950 total down the pipe. I have ordered a new barrel and I'm down to the last 50 bullets of the 1,000 I bought when I had this rifle put together. I plan to use the 8 month time between ordering and receiving my barrel to test some new stuff while the rifle is still a proven, reliable performer and I still have something known to fall back on. It is fully de-coppered and cleaned for this test.
CBTO of the ELDM is 2.618" and an overall length of 3.383" this will place me exactly 0.045" off the rifling. I'm currently set up to shoot the 230 Berger at 0.050" off the rifling (3.381" oal and CBTO 2.642") and I'm not inclined to switching my seating die for a preliminary maybe test.
Goals of this test... I am hoping, realistically, to land some place safely between 2,800 and 2,850 fps and then see what this old stick wants to find best accuracy with these new bullets and then compare them at distance to what I have been using. I know there is a node at 2,830fps with the Berger, but brass life is only two FIFI My current load in this rifle sends the 230 Berger OTM tactical with the best balance of accuracy, brass life and velocity at 2,740 fps. Maybe I'll find sometimg worth extending the time until I swap this barrel out

 

[Trnelson]

I finally had a chance to slip out to the range and see where this load sits. Atmospherics- 82• wind 160@15kts barometer 29.91"HG shooting direction 270• range
100 yards.
I started with a totally clean barrel.I fired a total of five rounds all from an ambient bore. The magnetospeed chronicled a velocity of 2,788 fps with a SD of 3 for the five shots loaded with 76.0g Norma 217. This same load sends the 230 Berger at 2,740 with an SD of 8. I run into pressure with the 230 Berger at 80.2g so I think I should have some room to safely chase upward for a node. The bolt lift was smooth, easy and extracted without hesitation, and primers appear to present no sign of excessive pressure, but I will mic the cases to check them for certain before I load anymore. The last three bullets printed pretty respectably, considering having started with an un-fouled barrel and the stiff 17mph breeze.
Before the next trip to the range I will load the last 50 Berger 230's I have for this rifle and will then see what some seating depth changes do for the grouping of the 225.
Photo should be rotated 1/4 turn right...

 

[Idaho Trecker]

Definitely going to keep watching this as I was going to try some more of the newer hornady M and X. I've been shooting the 140, 143, and 147 grain 6.5 cal. 208, 212, and 225 30 cal and 285 338 cal. After reading this i went and weighed a very small portion (only 3) of the 208, 225 and 285 just to see what a very small sample would yield after your findings. The 3 208 came out exact at 208. The 3 225 came in at 225.3, 225.3, and 224.9. The 285 was the worst out of them with them being 284.3, 285.4, and 284.5.

This is a very very small sample but your findings made me curious so I may be sorting all of them now.

 

[Trnelson]

I had originally started checking when I when I was developing a load with the 143 ELDX and had unexplained flyers. It was suggested to me that I should be checking and sorting. I sorted for weight and then again for base to ogive of the bullets and I have not had any more unexplained flyers. Once in a while the loose nut behind the optic flares up and pulls one (or two) but I haven't found a sorting method to exclude that issue yet.
Have you read through the thread on the ELDX bullets? If not it's worth the time if you are going to test that path. what can you share about your experience with the 147 ELDM??

 

[Trnelson]

I prepared the next round of 5 ELDM bullets for testing in my rifle. I don't think it is too far away from something as the last three bullets from the first test printed into .6MOA with a SD of just three (3fps) for the five shots over the magnetospeed. I am impressed with the extremely low SD and hope it holds up pretty close to that. My 'usual' load carries a SD of 8 fps.
I know the rifle is capable of consistently delivering 0.3MOA so I hope to improve upon the precision of this load a bit. In an effort to not drastically change anything I adjusted the seating depth to 2.613" CBTO for a 0.050" jump in my rifle. 0.005" shorter than my first test with these bullets. Incidentally, this replicates the jump of 0.050" I use in this rifle with the 230 Berger OTM Tactical.
I will be shooting these just as I did in the first test. With each shot coming from an ambient barrel, magnetospeed velocity recorded and into a target at 100 yards where I will record the group size.
Once I have the load ironed out I'll test the terminal performance. What range (s) are you guys interested in seeing? Any other details you would like to see a report on?

 

[Trnelson]

Results from today were not quite what I had hoped they would be, but this is why we test...
Atmospherics: 81• wind 120@3kts 29.87"HG humidity 42%
Velocity 2756 SD11
CBTO 2.613" 0.050" jump
Accuracy: 2.62MOA see photo.
Next trip I'll try closer to the lands and see if the accuracy tightens back up. Obviously, I went the wrong direction with my change in seating depth...
Rotate image 1/4 turn right.

 

[Idaho Trecker]

I had originally started checking when I when I was developing a load with the 143 ELDX and had unexplained flyers. It was suggested to me that I should be checking and sorting. I sorted for weight and then again for base to ogive of the bullets and I have not had any more unexplained flyers. Once in a while the loose nut behind the optic flares up and pulls one (or two) but I haven't found a sorting method to exclude that issue yet.
Have you read through the thread on the ELDX bullets? If not it's worth the time if you are going to test that path. what can you share about your experience with the 147 ELDM??

I followed the thread when it started until it turned into more garbage than it was worth for me to follow. I have only used the 147 in 2 different 6.5 creedmoor with both being Ruger American Predators. I would have 3 shot groups in the .3s for a time or 2 then wouldnt shoot for anything. I did not sort any of those bullets though but looking back it could be a place to start. I just gave up on them since the speed i would gain with the 140 eld m was a better balance for the creedmoor. I may sort some and see what they come up with.

This makes me want to also sort and try some more of the 225 in my 300 Sherman Shortmag. If I do I will update here.

 

[Trnelson]

This makes me want to also sort and try some more of the 225 in my 300 Sherman Shortmag. If I do I will update here.
Please do, I'd welcome any additional data points. I'm sure everyone is about sick of hearing from me in reference to this bullet.
I hope to head to the range again tomorrow to test again.

 

[Trnelson]

Here are the results from the latest 225 ELDM testing. I will be including more a bit more detail as I think that I am figuring out a few things in regard to this bullet and this rifle...
Atmospherics: 67• wind 040@12kts 30.04" HG 55%RH shooting direction 270•
CBTO 2.643" exact bullet weight 224.6g bullet base to ogive 0.884"
Brass: 2.497" 233.8g twice fired, annealed, neck sized 0.006" neck tension
Winchester large rifle magnum primer 5.3g
76.0g Norma 217
Velocity- 2,773fps SD 4 ES 10 over five (5) ambient bore shots
Accuracy- 1.42MOA @ 100 yards.
Still not close to what I'm looking for and what this rifle has proven able to deliver.
I am not impressed with the consistency of these bullets at all. I'm at a bit of a loss as to how and even if I should proceed with further testing.
Out of 200 total bullets lot #2170060 exactly 33 shared the same weight and base to ogive dimension. Within just the 224.6g bullet weight I noted base to ogive discrepancies between 0.881" and 0.888" I chose to use 0.884" and 224.6g as it held largest sample size. At this point in testing I have 18 bullets remaining in that sample size. I have a total of 18 different combinations of samples from 2241g to 225.2g and base to ogive measurements from 0.881" to 0.889".

 

[Trnelson]

This should have the picture...