Originally Posted By: Outlawkyote Im not an engineer, cant even spell it...lol
My data in the field is showing a difference though.
I believe you are seeing what you say, I just can't explain why the difference is so large. I can construct a credible scenarion that has them coming out about the same MV - that was in the previous post. Not a problem for anybody but me. I just like to understand things.
Quote:Ive had several chrono's over the last few years and my data is always similar between the chrono's. I purchased my own reamer ( i have two 22-243 middlested reamers now)so Ive got plenty of experience with the cartridge. Ive built barrels for some friends that are also showing +4200fps with the 55gr bullets so I know I dont have some magic vodoo going on. With the 55gr bullets Im running 40gr of rel15 to acheave those velocities and with the 80gr bullets Im running 44gr of rel22. Ive built barrels with everything from 14 twist to 8 twist from various barrel makers including factory punch out jobs. Most barrels are 26-28" and anything shorter in this overbore cartridge would be a waste of powder. Yes, the 22-243middlested and the 22-243 win have aprox the same powder capicity.
As a side note, Ive gotten the 40's to 4600 and the 35gr mef's to 5100fps.
Thats my reasoning behind going with the 22-243 as compared to the plain 243 was because the increase in velocities Ive been seeing.Ive had a couple 243's years ago and never saw the reasoning behind them excep that they can be an accurate little round. The lack of velocities was the reason Ive turned to wildcatting. Oddly even my 6mmx284 barely got the 80gr bullets past 3600fps. I just cant say the 6mm caliber has done much to impress me when my 2506 will get the 85gr bullets to 3600 and the 100gr bullets to 3440fps.Now that I purchase a 2506AI reamer I can get the 85' past 3800fps and the 100' past 3600.
With the various types of barrels, different types of powders and bullets, modeling something like this is prolly not going to be very accurate, only real world data is going to make or brake a load.
Most of the time, the models and my range performance are within a couple hundred fps of each other - usually within 5% which is remarkably accurate. It varies. I've had models that predicted witin 25 fps of what I averaged at the range, other times the model will be a couple hundred fps hi or lo. Larger cases, like .243 and .30-06 tend to model more accurately than small cases like the Hornet.
Simulation modeling, which is what QuickLoad is used for, as well as ballistics software, has it's limits which I'm more familiar with than most. On the other hand, when looking for a cartridge to match up with a hunting mission, one can eliminate a number of false starts by using the models first followed up by range testing. Modeling only takes time, range testing costs money, more these days than it used to. So I do a lot of modeling and then test that which looks most promising.
Quote:
Why your model is showing higher velocities when comparing them..... I dont know dude. Try taking both cartridges and compare them with the powder that each one will be best suited with for that bullet combo.
My model shows higher velocities for 6mm bullets and .223 brass compared with .224 bullets and the same brass. Your suggested approach is what I did with the 6x45 vs .223. I expect that prediction would prove out on the range but I'm not going to build a rifle just to prove it. The is a rather different situation. Apparently, if the relative volumes are just right for a powder, like N560 is in the .22-243, at least in models, all bets are off unless a powder that is as good a match can be found for the other candidate.
Quote: Now that weve gotten way off toppic.... Did you see the load data listed on reloders nest?
No, I didn't go look for it. I am uneasy taking load data off the WEB and just using it. I pretty much work with QuickLoad and the powder company manuals.
Fitch
