I am about 99.9% sure I just saw one for .338LM on midway usa as I was looking for one for my 7mmRM.
New to Reloading, need some help
- Thread starter TaergEno
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
I am about 99.9% sure I just saw one for .338LM on midway usa as I was looking for one for my 7mmRM.
I've seen the one made by L.E Wilson but from my understanding you just drop the case in the gauge to make sure your within min and max headspace and its not actually used to take a measurement on the shoulder. I may be wrong as it has happened before 
Anyone else have a take on this? Or know anything about it?
Anyone else have a take on this? Or know anything about it?I've seen the one made by L.E Wilson but from my understanding you just drop the case in the gauge to make sure your within min and max headspace and its not actually used to take a measurement on the shoulder. I may be wrong as it has happened before
Yes. It is go/ no go.
I didn't understand that you were looking to get a numerical measurement. That, I have not seen.
TaergEno
Member
Would one of those L.E. Wilson gauges be a good investment?
Also, I just got some Vihtavuori N160 and some Swift Scirocco II 210gr bullets.
I wanted to start working up loads for this and I cannot find anything relating to the 210gr bullets. I have contacted Swift and have yet to hear back from them. I looked up the VV reloading info and they have load data for 200gr and 225gr and up. Same with looking up Nosler and such, everything is 200gr or 225gr+.
What would be the best way to go about loading for 210gr? Should I take the VV load for the 200 and the load from 225 and average them? And use those numbers for the 210gr bullets? A straight avg of 200+225 gives 212.5, which is fairly close to 210gr. So I would think just doing the same with the load data would work. But I also feel that the bullet B.C. may play a role in the load so I am not sure if some more math would be needed to incorporate the B.C. into the load data. To come up with a safe load range to utilize.
VV Load Data:
200gr Min/Max = 89.6/96.0
225gr Min/Max = 78.3/87.0
Proposed 210gr Min/Max = 83.95/91.5 (Based on avg of the 200gr/225gr load data)
Any ideas/suggestions?
Also, I just got some Vihtavuori N160 and some Swift Scirocco II 210gr bullets.
I wanted to start working up loads for this and I cannot find anything relating to the 210gr bullets. I have contacted Swift and have yet to hear back from them. I looked up the VV reloading info and they have load data for 200gr and 225gr and up. Same with looking up Nosler and such, everything is 200gr or 225gr+.
What would be the best way to go about loading for 210gr? Should I take the VV load for the 200 and the load from 225 and average them? And use those numbers for the 210gr bullets? A straight avg of 200+225 gives 212.5, which is fairly close to 210gr. So I would think just doing the same with the load data would work. But I also feel that the bullet B.C. may play a role in the load so I am not sure if some more math would be needed to incorporate the B.C. into the load data. To come up with a safe load range to utilize.
VV Load Data:
200gr Min/Max = 89.6/96.0
225gr Min/Max = 78.3/87.0
Proposed 210gr Min/Max = 83.95/91.5 (Based on avg of the 200gr/225gr load data)
Any ideas/suggestions?
TaergEno
Member
Alright, so I plotted the Vihtavuori load data (from their site) for N160 for the following bullet weights: 200, 225, and 231gr
These plotted points appear to be 'linear' in how they plot.
I think created a trend line for these loads, which gave the following equations:
Min: y=-0.511x+192.05
Max: y=-0.4111x+178.43
When using these calculations for 210gr, I come up with the following load data:
Min: -0.511(210)+192.05 = 84.74
Max: -.04111(210)+178.43 = 92.099
Would these values be better to use, instead of the numbers obtained from just adding the 200 and 225 load data and dividing by 2?
These plotted points appear to be 'linear' in how they plot.
I think created a trend line for these loads, which gave the following equations:
Min: y=-0.511x+192.05
Max: y=-0.4111x+178.43
When using these calculations for 210gr, I come up with the following load data:
Min: -0.511(210)+192.05 = 84.74
Max: -.04111(210)+178.43 = 92.099
Would these values be better to use, instead of the numbers obtained from just adding the 200 and 225 load data and dividing by 2?
TaergEno
Member
Oh, and I finally found some actual load data for the bullet I have.
I found a Lyman book that was opened at Sportsmans Warehouse where I live and I browsed through it.
I found the following:
210 gr. Jacketed Scirocco BC .507 SD .263
Powder | Min Load | Velocity (FPS) | Pressure (PSI) | Max Load | Velocity (FPS) | Pressure (PSI)
RX19 | 83.0 | 2995 | 55,200 | 90.0 | 3167 | 62,000
N560 | 88.0 | 3070 | 57,200 | 95.0 | 3217 | 62,500
H-4831SC | 83.0 | 2921 | 55,500 | 88.0 | 3072 | 62,100
AA-3100 | 83.0 | 2956 | 55,200 | 91.0 | 3108 | 61,500
IMR-7828 | 86.0 | 2956 | 54,200 | 93.0 | 3106 | 59,500
Magnum | 95.0 | 2981 | 57,900 | 100.0 | 3095 | 61,900
Correct me if I am wrong, but does slower burning powder increase the pressure that is created?
Also, do you think that the above load data would work if using N160 instead of N560? According to the Vihtavuori Burn Rate Chart, N160 and N560 are close to the same burn rate? It appears that N560 is slightly slower burning than N160. Here is the chart I am referring to: Lapua/Vihtavuori Burn Rate Chart
I found a Lyman book that was opened at Sportsmans Warehouse where I live and I browsed through it.
I found the following:
210 gr. Jacketed Scirocco BC .507 SD .263
Powder | Min Load | Velocity (FPS) | Pressure (PSI) | Max Load | Velocity (FPS) | Pressure (PSI)
RX19 | 83.0 | 2995 | 55,200 | 90.0 | 3167 | 62,000
N560 | 88.0 | 3070 | 57,200 | 95.0 | 3217 | 62,500
H-4831SC | 83.0 | 2921 | 55,500 | 88.0 | 3072 | 62,100
AA-3100 | 83.0 | 2956 | 55,200 | 91.0 | 3108 | 61,500
IMR-7828 | 86.0 | 2956 | 54,200 | 93.0 | 3106 | 59,500
Magnum | 95.0 | 2981 | 57,900 | 100.0 | 3095 | 61,900
Correct me if I am wrong, but does slower burning powder increase the pressure that is created?
Also, do you think that the above load data would work if using N160 instead of N560? According to the Vihtavuori Burn Rate Chart, N160 and N560 are close to the same burn rate? It appears that N560 is slightly slower burning than N160. Here is the chart I am referring to: Lapua/Vihtavuori Burn Rate Chart
