Home | Ezine | Forums | Links | Contact
NitroExpress.com: 6.5X54 mm load

View recent messages : 24 hours | 48 hours | 7 days | 14 days | 30 days | 60 days | More Smilies


*** Enjoy NitroExpress.com? Participate and join in. ***

Shooting & Reloading - Mausers, Big Bores and others >> Mannlicher Discussion forum & Archive

Pages: 1
DonZ
.300 member


Reged: 24/12/12
Posts: 119
Loc: BW
6.5X54 mm load
      #330848 - 05/08/19 06:38 AM

I promised 9.3X64mm I would start a new post on the difficulties I was having working up a load with my 6.5X54mm rifle.

First, some notes:

The rifle is a M1903, built and proofed in 1939.

The rifle was very nice with new old stock RWS ammo. No issues, no problem. Very precise. I want to say it could be a 1 MOA rifle. Certainly less than 2.

I did try some NOS Interarms, and got very close to over-pressure. Biggest symptom was a very difficult to lift bolt handle. I considered saving the brass for reloading, but alas, Berdan primers. I made a couple of snap caps out of it, but that's it.

The rifle does like a "long load". I had 40 rounds made by a custom maker, who loaded Hornady RNSPs into the cannelure. Those rounds, unlike the NOS RWS would jam in the magazine. A slight increase in length (comparing the RWS with the ones made) seemed to be the difference. The RWS and the Interarms both had no difficulties while working the bolt. I had no issues with pressure, but could only use the rifle single shot. Loading long seems best.

I was trying to load 160 grain Woodleigh Barnes Protected Point. These bullets are actually a spitzer, and a bit long. Before I started firing, I did check that the sharper point worked in the magazine. The reason I wanted to try the protected point in lieu of the RNSP was in retaining speed. With a muzzle velocity of 2150 to 2200 fps, my charts showed that at 100m the RNSP would drop enough speed to put me below 1475 foot pounds of energy, Forgive my "flipping" between imperial and metric, but at 100 meters I need 1475 foot pounds to meet the German and Polish requirement for 2,000 joules. The "better" ballistic coefficient of the PP round kept enough speed to get me there. Even if I were hunting whitetail in the US, the spitzer would retain speed and limit bullet drop out to 300m. It "seemed like a good idea at the time".

At the time, there was a bit of a powder shortage. The only powder I could find was Vihtavuori N160. VV does not list load data on their site, but when I contacted them they suggested that a load similar to H4350 as listed in the Hornady manual (37.5 grains) should be a safe starting load.

I used Federal Match GM210M (not magnum) large rifle primers, in once fired Norma and RWS brass. Dies were provided by 4D in a Dillon 550 press.

I used a taper crimp of about .002 inches.

Cartridge Overall Length was 3.009 inches. (Honnady manual listed a max of 3.063. Brass was trimmed to 2.110.

I loaded a series of rounds, working up from 37 grains (10% less than the "safe load"), expecting about 2000 fps MV, and working up to the max listed of 40 grains, expecting a MV of 2200 fps.

37 grains gave me obvious signs of pressure: in addition to a dropped primer, at the base, where I measured the brass before firing at .4500 inches, it expanded to .4565. I stopped.

My first thought was perhaps too hot. I went down to 35 grains, with a COL of 2.999 - 3.002. Three rounds. Again, dropped primers. I stopped there.

I thought that perhaps the bullets were oversized, but the RWS makes me think not. I did use a micrometer on both RWS and the Woodleigh bullets just to check, but they were the same.

My four thoughts are:

1. I loaded to the lands. I don't think so, but could be. Answer: Cast the chamber (to be done).

2. Brass was too long. I can solve that by casting the chamber, too.

2. Headspace problems. The RWS rounds made me think not, the Interarms had me worried. Just in case, I used the "tape method", and measured the headspace to between .004" and .005", so probably not that.

3. My load was actually UNDER loaded. Perhaps the powder (when horizontal) was "below" the primer blast, and did not send the round down the barrel until too much pressure built up? I'm not very experienced at this, but I've heard that's possible. Of course, after dropping a primer, I wasn't about to add more powder.

I don't think it was the slight taper crimp.

My thought at the time was that perhaps the PP was too far, and I should stick to RNSP. I would still like to get it to work, if possible. I should probably find a listed powder, get the RNSP to work, and then try PP, but I'm not sure.

I am very much open to suggestions. I know I can get a bit more speed from 140 grain, and probably hit 2,000 joules that way, but I'd really like to go with 160 grain if possible.

Thanks for any advice anyone has!

--------------------
Honor never grows old, and honor rejoices the heart of age...


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
DarylS
.700 member


Reged: 10/08/05
Posts: 26489
Loc: Beautiful British Columbia, Ca...
Re: 6.5X54 mm load [Re: DonZ]
      #330849 - 05/08/19 09:37 AM

My first thought - will a bullet drop freely into a fired case? If it won't fit easily, then tight necks are the problem, likely (brass is too thick) with THAT brass.

Hornady Handbook printed in 1967 shows with 160gr. RN in the 6.5x54mm 18" bl.:
Moderate load 35.6gr. IMR4350 - 2,000fps, with max at 39.0gr. 2,200fps
Moderate load 37.5gr. H4831 --- 2,000fps, with max at 40.4gr. 2,200fps.

H4350 and IMR4350 might or might not be interchangeable in that ctg. with that bullet in that rifle.

While N160 might be close in burn rate to IMR4350, that does not mean it is a grain for grain replacement for IMR4350. Now, IMR4350 has changed a bit over the years as well. It produces more pressure and energy per grain than it used to produce. As well, different lot numbers produce different results. Energy per grain is most important when comparing 2 different powders.

It is possible that Viht powders or some Viht powders produce higher energy per grain than other slow burning powders. How that effects pressure is perhaps the stickler.

Blowing primers at 35.0gr. N160 sounds very suspicious to me. I am sure something else is going on.

Without chronographing the loads, the field of possibilities is very small indeed.
I would check the cases first. Long loading, impinging/touching the lands is also a pressure booster. Put a couple of these possibilities together and pressure spikes result.

First step is to check a bullet in the neck of a fired case. Does it fit easily?

If easy fit, load a smoked or felt-pen marked bullet into an empty sized case at your current oal. with primer and chamber it. Then extract it and look for land marks. If so, you need to see the bullet deeper. I suggest at least .020" jump.

Now, chamber that more deeply seated(if necessary)empty bulleted ctg. and fire the primer. Does it back out? If so, that is the amount of headspace with THAT brass.

After this, what did you find out?

--------------------
Daryl


"a gun without hammers is like a Spaniel without ears" King George V


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
93x64mm
.416 member


Reged: 07/12/11
Posts: 3978
Loc: Nth QLD Australia
Re: 6.5X54 mm load [Re: DarylS]
      #330873 - 06/08/19 06:34 AM

Don, I would definitely do the bullet in the fired case trick first; as Daryl stated this could be the clincher & most likely culprit.
I would like to make a further suggestion here though, I think you need a good set of vernier calipers & a chronograph or at least access to these before you go much further.
After that neck test & if a smoked dummy round proves that you OAL is okay to work through the magazine without binding yet not overly long to contact the rifling then a chamber cast will definitely be in order!
I'd still watch if the crimp you are applying doesn't 'buckle' the case - it could be a cause as well?
Keep us informed please.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
DarylS
.700 member


Reged: 10/08/05
Posts: 26489
Loc: Beautiful British Columbia, Ca...
Re: 6.5X54 mm load [Re: 93x64mm]
      #330883 - 06/08/19 02:08 PM

Yes - I am interested in the on-going situation as well.
A buckled case will certainly hinder chambering but I cannot see where it might effect extraction.
Crimping on bullets without a cannelure is not wise & usually does no good. ( buckling is the oft-result as 9.3x64 noted)

With descent bullet pull (snug seating), there is no need for crimping in bolt action rifles with vertical stacking magazines.

Crimping will not effect pressures, normally - most ALL factory ammo is NEEDLESSLY crimped, imho, except for rounds loaded in tubular magazines, like the Winchester and Marlin lever guns.
If crimping improved accuracy in normal CF rounds, bench rest & long range competition shooters would be crimping their handloads.
They don't even in excessively short necked rounds like the .300 Win. Mag.

--------------------
Daryl


"a gun without hammers is like a Spaniel without ears" King George V


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Waidmannsheil
.400 member


Reged: 19/04/13
Posts: 2376
Loc: Melbourne Australia
Re: 6.5X54 mm load [Re: DarylS]
      #330884 - 06/08/19 04:24 PM

Daryl, I can't quite agree with you there about not needing to crimp. I would say that it very much depends on the cartridge and the magazine shape. On both my 338WM and my 458WM which are both in Model 70's, if I don't crimp then the projectiles particularly on the last round will be seated significantly deeper than where they started due to recoil.
I never use the taper crimp function in the seating die but instead use the Lee factory crimp dies which produce a parallel factory style crimp. After that I have no problems at all.

Matt.

--------------------
There is nothing wrong with vegetarian food, so long as there is meat with it.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
DarylS
.700 member


Reged: 10/08/05
Posts: 26489
Loc: Beautiful British Columbia, Ca...
Re: 6.5X54 mm load [Re: Waidmannsheil]
      #330890 - 07/08/19 02:00 AM

A number of guys I know who shoot .338 Win. Mag. and load for it here, do not crimp. Pretty sure the .338 Lapua guys do not crimp either.

I certainly agree with the .458 needing to be crimped, but that is a different ball of wax and there are multiple reasons to crimp that one & other straight or almost straight cased rounds.

Virtually all straight case heavy recoiling rounds should be crimped just to improve powder burning, let alone any other reason. If recoil seats the bullet deeper, then yes, need a tighter neck fit, or crimping to hold the bullet against recoiling into the magazine front end and pushing the bullets deeper.

I had to neck my .458's (.458 Alaskan, and pair of .458 2") just to get good ballistics.

The heaviest recoiling necked cases I have ever used was the 9.5x68 and .375H&H. My current .375/06IMP about duplicates actual .375H&H ballistics (up to 4,200fpe) and it does not need crimping.

The light recoiling 6.5x54 does not have a recoil problem that will seat bullets different, as far as I know. Even my .264 Winchester did not need to be crimped.

I crimped, that is I had to crimp the .22Hornet and .218Bee just to get consistent ballistics due to bullet movement prior to powder ignition. In these two cases, crimping was necessary just for ballistics reasons.

None of my standard dies taper crimp. They all roll crimp.
I agree with the use of Lee crimp dies as the bullet does not need a cannelure for crimping as those dies use a collet system and do not push the case up against a smaller interior ring in the die as normal crimp dies perform.
A taper crimp die is a die that has a gentle taper inside, not a crimping ring.
Most taper crimp dies are made for Semi-auto rim that headspace on the ctg. mouth. These dies press the case neck onto the bullet, increasing bullet pull strength, yet leave the case neck's mouth for proper headspacing.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
DonZ
.300 member


Reged: 24/12/12
Posts: 119
Loc: BW
Re: 6.5X54 mm load [Re: Waidmannsheil]
      #330891 - 07/08/19 02:01 AM

I hate to disappoint, but it will be some time before I will be back with this rifle in order to do some of the tests. I MIGHT be able to do the dropped round in the case trick, but I don't think that's it.

I do have both the calipers and a Labradar for a chronograph. Of the two rounds I fired, one did not register, the other registered at about 350 fps, which was either a bad reading, or the round really was going that slow.

When I determined COA, I seated a round by hand slightly long, chambered it very slowly, and then backed the round off from there. I'm trying to remember if I smoked/sharpied it first, but I didn't take notes on that. One point I was confused on was the "sharpness" and length of the bullet. I could see it pointing well past the chamber, but with the meplat, not touching lands. Hornady lists max COA for the 140 grain spitzer as 2.950 and 160 grain RNSP as 2.970. From my notes, I measured between 2.999 (that was the last round fired) and 3.009. I see I wrote above that there was a Hornady max in my notes for 3.063. I need to go back and find out which bullet that was for. I was either within that spec, or between .029 and .049 long. I might have been touching lands (my first thought), but a chamber cast will give me a better idea.

I have a fuzzy memory of a gauge that measured how far down the shoulder was compared to spec, but I don't remember details other than "that seems right". This was done after the fact.

I have one question based on ignorance. I understand the "no crimp" arguments, and considered taking that die out of the mix. I set it very lightly. The reason I used it, however, was not recoil. The 6.5 is pretty light in that area. My concern was the load ramp combined with the spitzer point. I thought I'd be jamming the bolt pretty hard to make sure the sharp point would climb the ramp, so it made sense to me to tighten it just a little. Was I way out to lunch on that one?

--------------------
Honor never grows old, and honor rejoices the heart of age...


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
DonZ
.300 member


Reged: 24/12/12
Posts: 119
Loc: BW
Re: 6.5X54 mm load [Re: DonZ]
      #330896 - 07/08/19 04:14 AM

I found some fired brass and a bullet, and learned a few things.

Two batches of brass: 20 Norma and 20 RWS.

For the Norma brass, the bullet dropped in without a problem.

For the RWS, the bullet fit in and out, but it was more of a "friction fit". Not difficult, but not wide open like the Norma.

Because both were fired from the same rifle, I looked closer.

RWS brass is a bit thicker than the Norma. I could see how the OD would be the same, but the ID would be a bit tighter.

Also, the RWS looked a bit longer, and as if there were a slight crimp in the end. I put my caliper on it, and the Norma was at 2.10, and the RWS at 2.11. My Forster case trimmer was still handy, so I threw it in. When RWS was down to 2.10, the bullet fit better. There was still friction (tighter ID), but better.

I think in the future I will be sure to anneal, and also swipe the inside of the rim with some emery paper. Just enough to reduce the friction.

But really need to figure out where the lands are.

--------------------
Honor never grows old, and honor rejoices the heart of age...

Edited by DonZ (07/08/19 04:18 AM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
93x64mm
.416 member


Reged: 07/12/11
Posts: 3978
Loc: Nth QLD Australia
Re: 6.5X54 mm load [Re: DonZ]
      #330901 - 07/08/19 06:08 AM

Well you're one step closer Don to working things out!
Keep chipping away, most reloading issues are quite easy - then there are ones like yours!
It is not a bad thing - just a series of extra hurdles, but when it all comes together the results are all that more sweeter!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Hook
.224 member


Reged: 01/03/18
Posts: 37
Loc: Heart of Dixie
Re: 6.5X54 mm load [Re: 93x64mm]
      #330910 - 07/08/19 02:21 PM

Having fun now, aren't'cha Don!

About 18 months ago I acquired a 1903....also proofed in 1939. How is that for a coincident? Before talking loads, I am curious whether your receiver is marked "Made in Germany"? Mine is actually marked "Made in Austria" which is quite unusual for a 1939 build I am told.

Now, loads. I will start off by admitting that I was not, and am still not, trying to come up with a load for long range. I tried various spitzers of different weights and just could not find an OAL where they would feed smoothly. The best spitzer load (again, wrt feeding) was old Norma factory 139 gr loads. I stumbled on a stash of Norma factory loads in the old wood grain box from the 60s/70s and bought them all, primarily for the brass. Twelve of the boxes were the 139 gr spitzers along with one box of 156 gr RN. I shared most of the spitzers with friends. Strangely enough, the 139s chrono'ed 2290 fps out of my rifle while the 156 gr RNs chrono'ed 2330 fps! That velocity concerned me enough that I pulled the other 17 rounds not fired over the chrono and reloaded them with 40 gr of H4831SC.

Those spitzers fed OK in my rifle s long as I operated the bolt smartly! Cycle it slowly and the round would hang up every time. I shot all I kept mostly just for fun except one that busted a little 7 pt whitetail. From this point n I'll be using only reloads. I have pretty much settled on 160 gr Hornady RNs (the .264" version) and Norma 156 gr RN. Loaded to an OAL of 3.05", they both feed as slick as marbles on glass IN MY RIFLE.

As mentioned above, my load is 40 gr of H4831SC and it chrono's at 2025 fps in my rifle. The old period Hensoldt 4X was foggy and the post reticle was fuzzy, but I still shot several MOA and sub MOA groups with it. However, most groups fell into the 1.5 MOA range and I consider it to be a solid 1.5 MOA rifle.

I sent the Hensoldt to Iron Sight, Inc., and they did a great job of cleaning the scope up. They also replaced the post reticle and one of the rear lenses. When I got it back, white trying to get the windage readjusted using the rear base of the claw mounts, I fired this group:



Now, I know this group was a fluke, but it sure made me feel good when I saw it.

My advice to you, after playing with my 1903 for all these months, is to keep playing with different OALs for the bullets you want to use. The rotary magazines are finicky and you have to find their sweet spot. Don't know if I can offer any help other than possibly the above, I'll be happy to try.

Edited by Hook (07/08/19 02:25 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Pages: 1



Extra information
0 registered and 52 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  CptCurl 

Print Topic

Forum Permissions
      You cannot start new topics
      You cannot reply to topics
      HTML is disabled
      UBBCode is enabled

Rating:
Topic views: 2874

Rate this topic

Jump to

Contact Us NitroExpress.com

Powered by UBB.threads™ 6.5.5


Home | Ezine | Forums | Links | Contact


Copyright 2003 to 2011 - all rights reserved