Since the fabrication of the .17 Predator is complete, (see here for that story http://thehunterslife.com/forums/showthread.php?t=17859&page=14) I am starting a new thread on load development for it.

I suppose a picture of the 'beast' is appropriate in the initial post. (Is "beast" an oxymoron when referring to a rifle chambered in a .17 caliber cartridge?)





My goal with this rifle is pretty simple:  To launch a small bullet as fast as I can, and have it hit a relatively small - three to four inch - target at 300 yd.

There are of course a couple of qualifiers:
1) I don't like "hot" loads. "Hot" loads are defined by me as those that significantly shorten the useful life of the brass, and that "beat up" the firearm.
2) I'm not interested in spending time, money, and reloading resources on eeking out the absolute smallest group possible with this rifle. While I expect sub-minute-of-an-angle (MOA) precision, once it reaches that benchmark, I'm finished with "load work-up".

OKAY... Enough of that stuff. Let me get to RELOADING!

The goals for today are to:
1) Fire-for-function more than just "one or two" rounds, AND
2) "Kill" some plastic milk jugs.

The latter goal is because I have shot many a milk jug with the .17 Remington cartridge, and it is both impressive and FUN! Since paperwhipping on this cartridge's load workup in QuickLOAD (QL) suggests that it should go about 200 f/s faster than the .17 Rem, I'm kinda excited about the potential 'explosions' this thing can produce from plastic milk jugs. :D

Since this is all "new", I'm starting with two bullets - Hornady 25-grain Hollow Points (HP) and Hornady 20-grain V-Maxes - and two powders - IMR 3031 and Reloader 17 (RL-17). Since I won't be getting too serious about precision today, I'm only loading 4 cartridges of each 'kind'. I have not precisely determined chamber length - yet. Twist rate on the barrel is 1 complete rotation in 8 inches of barrel (1:8).

All loads have the following components in common: The cases are Remington .223 Rem cases. The primers are Remington 6 1/2 Small Rifle. All cartridges have an overall length (COAL) of 2.15". For ballistic calculation purposes, the barrel is 26.5" long.

The loads are:
1) 25-grain HP - 28.5 grains of RL-17.
 QL says this will produce a muzzle velocity (MV) of 4346 f/s at a max pressure of 53,939 PSI. With a 250 yd "zero" and this rifle's physical sight system, the predicted trajectory is 1.3" high at 175 yd and 2.3" low at 300 yd, with an impact velocity of 2437 f/s and 327 ft-lbs of energy.

2) 25-grain HP - 24.0 grains of I3031.
 QL says this will produce a muzzle velocity (MV) of 4266 f/s at a max pressure of 53,877 PSI. With a 250 yd "zero" and this rifle's physical sight system, the predicted trajectory is 1.4" high at 175 yd and 2.4" low at 300 yd, with an impact velocity of 2378 f/s and 314 ft-lbs of energy.

3) 20-grain V-Max - 25.1 grains of I3031.
 QL says this will produce a muzzle velocity (MV) of 4625 f/s at a max pressure of 54,030 PSI. Here, QL "bogs down". It can't calculate external ballistic values for MVs faster than 4501 f/s. So the following numbers are for that MV. With a 250 yd "zero" and this rifle's physical sight system, the predicted trajectory is 1.1" high at 175 yd and 2.1" low at 300 yd, with an impact velocity of 2509 f/s and 280 ft-lbs of energy. If we add that extra 125 f/s back on the 'end' (not technically correct, but close enough for this paper-whipping exercise), we get an impact velocity of 2609 and impact energy of 302 ft-lbs. That's higher than 'truth', but not too much.

4) 20-grain V-Max - 1.65 grams (25.46 grains) of I3031.
 QL says this will produce a muzzle velocity (MV) of 4682 f/s at a max pressure of 56,587 PSI. Here again, QL "bogs down". It can't calculate external ballistic values for MVs faster than 4501 f/s. So the following numbers are for that MV. With a 250 yd "zero" and this rifle's physical sight system, the predicted trajectory is 1.1" high at 175 yd and 2.1" low at 300 yd, with an impact velocity of 2510 f/s and 280 ft-lbs of energy. (The same as for the 25.1 grain load.) If we add that extra 182 f/s back on the 'end' (not technically correct, but close enough for this paper-whipping exercise), we get an impact velocity of 2692 and impact energy of 321 ft-lbs. That's higher than 'truth', but not too much.

I have the Magneto-Speed chronograph 'hooked up'. I am sincerely hoping that it can 'catch' a tiny bullet going 4600+ f/s.

I'm hoping to get video of the exploding milk jugs.

Paul

I didn't want to drive all the way to the rifle range and find out that the Magneto-Speed (MS) couldn't catch even the "slow" 25-grain bullets, so I lit one off 'out the back door'. First shot across the MS registered 4321 f/s for the RL-17 load (#1 above). QL predicted 4346 f/s with that charge. That's within one half of one percent. :D

While I didn't have a target set up, I did have a "target" that I could see a "hit" on and determine how close to point of aim I was. (Recall that the scope hasn't been sighted in or even bore-sighted for that matter.) I was holding the rifle off-hand, and the point of impact was within 2" of the point of aim. :D

No signs whatsoever of any sort of "pressure". No bolt-lift stiffness. No marks on the head. Everything looks "mild" at a MV of 4321 f/s with a 25-grain HP. :D:D:D:D:D

The milk jugs are trembling.

Paul

PS - By the way... My go to load on my .17 Rem generates an average MV of 4112 f/s with a 25-grain bullet. This cartridge - based on a sample size of ONE - is producing the 200+ f/s increase in MV over the .17 Rem. I'm liking that.

Paul

PPS - I just checked the MS site (magnetospeed.com) and they report measures of precision of .1%. That's good! Therefore, assuming the maximum error, the velocity above of 4321 f/s could have been anywhere from 4317 to 4325 f/s.

Paul

I would advise not using the rem 6 1/2 primer, they are too soft for high performance ammo - use 7 1/2's.

There is a warning on the packet and the 17rem in my experience will pierce the primers.

Interesting. I hadn't noticed the warning. I have some 7 1/2s - Bench Rest - primers, and will use them after I have 'unloaded' these 15 remaining rounds. Thanks for the heads up.

Paul

I rechecked the base of the case, and indeed the primer had been pierced! Don't know how I missed that! Not happy about that, as now I HAVE to pull all of those bullets, pour out the powder, deprime the unused 6 1/2s, seat 7 1/2s, add powder, and reseat bullets. :frown

Glad you told me! I woulda been calling that a pressure "issue". Still annoyed at myself for not seeing it. :o :frown :angry: Got too excited at 4321 f/s.

Paul

Okay. That's done. Gr...

So I was pretty sure I had some Small Rifle, Remington 7 1/2, Bench Rest primers. I don't. Instead, I have some Remington LARGE Rifle, Bench Rest primers. However, that's the "bad" news. The "GOOD" news is, I have an "armload" of CCI Small Rifle and Small Rifle MAGNUM, primers. I used the "Magnum" version.

I also went ahead and fired the rest of the Rl-17 cartridges. The MVs were (including the first one):
1) 4321
2) 4306
3) 4310
4) 4255

Don't ask me what happened to the last one. I haven't a clue. With the last one, the average is 4297 f/s. Not counting the fourth one - which appears to be anomalous - the average is 4312. Actually, not that much difference out of 4300 feet per second.

The before shot and after shot case dimensions are uniformly about 0.001" larger in the fired case diameters, and no difference in length dimensions. This just means that 1) The fire-forming was providing complete fill-out, and 2) these weren't "hot" charges. :D After I quit 'playing around' here, I will start 'inching' up and see what there is to see as the speed goes up.

Either I was 'dreaming' about being within 2" of the point of aim with the first shot, or the rifle is "spraying" them about, or they're 'coming apart', because I aimed 3" left and 3" right and dead center of a 1/2 gal plastic milk jug and missed it all three times. At 40 yd. I was more interested in MVs than 'killing' a milk jug, but clearly I need to at least bore sight the thing. trouble is, I don't want to spend too much effort on "sighting in" if I'm absolutely going to change rings, and probably change the 'scope.

It's too late today to make it to the range before dark, so it'll have to be tomorrow for more range data. Then there WILL be 'dead milk jug' pictures at least, and hopefully video.

Paul

well you have got those 25 grainers cooking!

Quote from: farmboy;135423well you have got those 25 grainers cooking!

Yeah! And the 20s are supposed to be doing 4600+!

Paul

Under the category of "Ain't nuthin' easy"...

I went to get the scope matter 'sussed' and of course nuthin' is easy (ala Jethro Tull).

First - Ever try to bore sight a .17 caliber rifle? With 63-year-old eyes? Nuthin is easy, and that sure as the dickens isn't.

Second - Since I couldn't see through the bore, I had to come up with some method of getting the scope and the bore at least grossly aligned. Aha! I have an NC Star bore-sighting kit - http://www.amazon.com/NcStar-Laser-Sighter-Arbor-TLZ/dp/B001CTKPHQ/ref=sr_1_3?s=sporting-goods&ie=UTF8&qid=1416449815&sr=1-3&keywords=ncstar+boresight+kit But... nuthin' is easy. The .17 caliber arbor would fit in the muzzle, but the head of the screw that expands the arbor was just too big. Nuthin' is easy. So... I had to remove the screw and take it out to the shop, chuck it in my drill press, and take some 80-grit sand-paper to it. In a few minutes, it just barely did fit.

So I screwed the laser into the arbor, flipped it on, and looked through the 'scope. Nuthin' is easy. The cross-hairs were about 4 to 5 inches low and left. I started turning the adjustment knobs. I ran out of both windage an elevation before the cross-hairs centered - or even got particularly close - on the laser dot. Nuthin' is easy. Ok, now I'm beginning to get a little bent out of shape. Fine. I'll just put another scope on it. Nuthin' is easy.

Third - I have another 'scope that is a "target" 6.5-20x50. It's an ugly beast to my eye, but as I said before, this rifle isn't about "beauty", it's about speed. I got the other 'scope out. It already had Burris rings for Weaver bases on it. However, since nuthin' is easy, they couldn't be put on from the side, they had to be slipped on from one end or the other. Fine.

Fourth - I was aligning them and noticed how short the distance was from the front of the ocular bell to the rear of the objective bell. This is the maximum distance you can mount rings on that 'scope. At that maximum distance, the rings were not far enough apart to line up with the slots in the Weaver bases. It was about 0.150" short. Nuthin' is easy.

Fifth - Fine. I took the Weaver two-piece bases off. Even once off, they wouldn't fit the Burris rings! GOOD GRIEF! Nuthin' is easy. Fine. I've got some one-piece Weaver bases for the Savage 110, I'll just put those on.

Sixth - Nuthin' is easy. I got the one-piece Weaver base out and tried it on the rings before putting the base on the rifle. Voila', the rings fit on the base without binding, AND the slot spacing was close enough to fit the short distance between the rings on the 'scope! I put the base on the rifle AND THE MOUNTING HOLES DIDN'T LINE UP! Nuthin' is easy! At that point, I didn't care, I mounted two of the screws and put the scope on the base. Nuthin' is easy. The objective bell hit the barrel. Just barely, but it was touching nonetheless. I didn't care at that point, I wanted to see if the scope could be aligned. I could get higher rings. The scope was the same amount out of alignment and I ran out of adjustment in both windage and elevation before getting the cross-hairs on the laser dot. Nuthin' is easy! However, now I'm getting a little worried that there is something wrong with the alignment of the 'scope base mounting holes in the receiver. Nuthin is easy. FINE!

Seventh - To heck with this! I would just go to Sportsman's Warehouse and get a picatinny rail. The spacing would be right, and the elevated rail would take care of the objective bell hitting the barrel. I gave SW a call to make sure they had picatinny rails for a Savage Axis in stock. They did. Fine. I got my self 'together' and went to SW. When I got there, I asked for the guy I had spoken to on the phone. He remembered the conversation and went right to the part.  A HUNDRED AND NINETEEN DOLLARS FOR A CHEAP PIECE OF ALUMINUM! I didn't catch myself before I expressed my "surprise" at that OUTRAGEOUS price! The guys behind the counter acted offended. I didn't care! That price is INSANE and I told them so. Nuthin' is easy.

I explained my problem - a 'short-coupled' 'scope - and one of them suggested two-piece Leupold bases specifically for the Axis. "Only" $35. Fine. Since I was considering putting the Zeiss Conquest on the rifle, I decided to get some 30mm Leupold rings so in case the 6.5-20x50 'scope didn't work, I wouldn't have to come back to SW to get rings for it. FIFTY DOLLARS for the 30mm Leupold rings! Nuthin' is easy.

Eighth - I get home, put the Leupold bases on the Axis and some 1" Leupold rings on the 'scope. The objective DOES NOT HIT THE BARREL! Yay! However, nuthin' is easy. I run out of adjustment AGAIN! Now I AM worried about the receiver. OK. All stop, back 2/3rds. (Navy parlance for sit down and figure this out.) The "weak link" in the 'system' was the laser arbor. I "adjusted" it and looked through the 'scope again. AH. That was at least most of the problem. Things are looking up, but... Nuthin' is easy. Once the rings were tightened, the objective bell hit the barrel again! Nuthin' is easy.

Ninth - Now, all the way back to using the FIRST 'scope. It has a 40mm objective and is on medium rings. It will NOT hit the barrel. Now if it will only NOT run out of adjustment.

It did not once I had "adjusted" the arbor. I don't THINK there is an alignment issue with the receiver. This is not my first choice for a 'scope on this rifle. In fact, it's not my second choice either. BUT, it will 'do' for now. I THINK what I will ultimately do is get some "high" rings and use the short-coupled, 6.5-20x50 scope. I like the 20 power for this rifle.

Oh yeah. The Zeiss Conquest has a 1" tube. The 30mm rings don't fit it. Good grief! Of course I can take them back, and at $50, I WILL.

Hopefully, the weather will clear up tomorrow - it is supposed to - and I can get to the range. However, tonight, there is a weather advisory. It's been raining all day, and it's going back to freezing tonight. We'll see. Nuthin' is easy...

Paul

A day like that can drive a man to drink!

Is that a definition of 'goat rope'?

AMEN!

But I must say, when one decides to 'take on' a wildcat, AND do the work themselves, they better take some big patience pills 'cause... wait for it...

Nuthin' is easy when it comes to building wildcats. :D

Paul

In my experience, most goat ropes don't end as well as this did.

Paul

Filed under sucking eggs....

A horrible job but doable - bore sighting a 17 cal.

Clean barrel and a high contrast aiming point like the corner of the eaves on a building against the sky. Trying to find the aiming point on target paper is almost impossible fer ol farts (me included).

Good suggestions! But the real problem in my case was not being able to focus on something through the barrel. "Finding" something hadn't even become available yet! Trying to look through a .172" hole through a 27" tube from 2' behind the tube is tough at any time. When you have age-onset myopia, it's basically impossible.

I have never really needed the SC Star arbors before, and had, until today, considered them something I bought that I found was not particularly useful. Today it proved its use to me. However, I have got to come to grips with the alignment. I didn't try to push the arbor into the bore until it hit its shoulder. Even doing that does not ENSURE that alignment will be perfectly in line with the bore. But it should be the best possible alignment. .17 caliber is just SMALL!

Paul