243WSSM COL puzzle
My reloading data book lists max col as 2.600, all the loads listed for 95 and 100 gr bullets call for a col of 2.300 min. When I try a 2.300 col round in my Browning Medallion it absolutly will not feed from the mag. The nose is right up against a flat surface and will not budge. I measure WW Super-X 100gr factory at 2.130 and WW Supreme 95gr at 2.230. They both feed perfectly. The Supreme groups well under an inch. When I make my handloads with same bullet and same col, they too group under an inch and feed fine showning less pressure and vel than factory. Could the data books be wrong?
0
-
Ive run into the same problem on these super short actions. the magazine is so short that you cant go by any book specs. you have to seat the bullet as deep as necessary to make it work.
This is another reason I wouldnt own one of these . Ive reloaded this round for some customers and you have to go beyond the loading specs to get it up to standard 243 Winchester performance.
My take on the super short rounds is that they are nothig but a sales gimmick for the gun mfg's. The regular short mags(not super short) are a little better.
<BR>0 -
D.S. Cole
I've heard the same thing about the .223 WSSM as you and others have said about the .243 WSSM.
However, I will say I'm very impressed with the .25 WSSM. I get 25-06 velocities with .257 Rbts (+1-2 grs.) powder loads.
MY big drawback with the .25 that I got was that it was an ultralight hunting rifle and it has this little whippy barrel that doesn't like the 117's and 120 gr. bullets that it was twisted for. They keep hunting accuracy. But, had I bought the Coyote model I think I would have been a little happier for long range shooting accuracy. It will however, get right up in a short barrel and put 120's out right alongside what 25-06's will. Unfortunately, I didn't come across what I think is the ultimate rifle for this caliber. A lightweight rifle with a 22" heavy sporter/light varmint barrel.
We have the second amendment so that all the rest are secure....UNK>0 -
SandWarrior
When the WSSM first became available and there was very lttle reloading info around,I talked to the Sierra technicians about them. The Sierra people had done some experimenting with loads and were very unimpressed at that time with the 243.However the 25 WSSM looked to them to be the best of the group.As the bore gets bigger the case capacity can be utilized much more efficiently without pressure problems.They figured that 25/06 performance could be duplicated.
The positive side to the short mags is that most everyone reports very good accuracy. They are easy to shoot a tiny group with ,when you work up a load that clicks.
The 25 would be my choice if I was buying one.
<BR>0 -
Mark,
"I measure WW Super-X 100gr factory at 2.130 and WW Supreme 95gr at 2.230. They both feed perfectly..."
In this case, the reloading manuals (data books) are not wrong since this OAL is the one established by Winchester and approved by SAAMI. However the OAL is wrong for those particular magazines so they should be shortened for proper and safe function. If a particular OAL loads and feeds perfectly, by all means use that OAL. Just be sure to work up your loads for that OAL.
"Could the data books be wrong?"
One of the basic rules for reloading is that all of the data supplied through reloading manuals and websites that have reloading information is that this information is FOR REFERENCE ONLY. It is not absolute, otherwise we should be able to start right at the top loads and feel perfectly safe in doing so. Why do you think that we put so much stress on the concept of start low and work the loads up slowly watching for signs of pressure? There are no absolutes in reloading as far as the listed loads are concerned other than this rule.
There are also too many other variable that need to be considered when reloading for a particular rifle and cartridge. Barrels vary considerably as do the chambers and both will have a significant effect on your reloading. That's why we test loads.
"When I make my handloads with same bullet and same col, they too group under an inch and feed fine showning less pressure and vel than factory. Could the data books be wrong?"
Loading manuals (data books) can be wrong most certainly and they have been. These are usually mistakes in editing although Barnes had a manual that was really off in big blocks of data and a disclaimer had to be issued until a new manual could be printed. Fortunately, reloaders are a pretty close knit group and word got out rapidly, to check the data first before just loading up.
Factories don't usually use the same powders that are available to the average reloader. They use powders that are developed for particular cartridges just for the factory. We, as reloaders, have to test similar powders in order to arrive at the same or similar pressures and velocities. If your loads are showing less pressure and lower velocities you could try to increase the load weight slightly to see if you can get closer to the factory information. However, accuracy is the deciding factor in my loads. Try some more loads and see what happens. You might be pleasantly surprised.
Remember, ALL RELOADING INFORMATION IS FOR REFERENCE ONLY.
Best. And enjoy the process!
ADDED:
I forgot to mention that no matter what OAL that works for your 243 WSSM, the cartridge will have at least 2 more grains of powder space than there is in the standard 243 Win. case. The 243 Win. holds about 53 grains of H2O to the top of the neck while the 243WSSM holds 58 grains of H2O to the same spot. Now, 5 grains of powder in this instance is a 9.4% increase in powder space and that will make a decisive difference in load velocities. When I load for the 243 WSSM, I am at least 100 to 150 fps. above anything that will load in the 243 Win. and at safe pressures. That puts me right around the factory listed velocities with similar bullets, safely.
If a reloader is having problems achieving safe but higher velocities they need to test some new loads or accept that their particular rifle isn't capable of yielding the higher velocities. It happens all the time. I have tested rifles with the same maufacturer's barrels and they can vary as much as 200 FPS with the same loads. As precise as we would like all this stuff to be, it just isn't. Learn to work with the variables but be safe.
0 -
Thanks nononsense - a great and lengthy answer - thanks for taking the time to answer. It is obvious to me that my medallion will not accept a COL longer than the WW Supreme factory load which uses the combined technologies 95 gr bullet. I like the bullet and it shoots well under an inch. The WW is using some kind of ball powder. I know you can't tell by looking and as you point out ww may be using a powder I can't get. But a max load (by the book) of H414 and the CT bullet gives me 3050 and the WW factory 3250, with my hand loads showing much less pressure, the factory loads have very flat primers and stiff, heavy bolt lift. I don't want to go there, those have always been "red flags". I would call the factory stuff too hot. Just so happens I have a Burris Balistic Plex on my Medallion. Its range tick marks are perfect for a bullet going 3000 so I have a handload that is a good marriage to the gun in all respects and I am not going to push for mor velocity- I know I am duplicating 243 win but I do have it in a lighter rifle with a shorter action. Had I to do it all again I would have taken an A bolt in 243W, but all is well. 0 -
You can get an aftermarket magazine well with a little more room in it...which can be put in by any decent gunsmith.
Eric
allamericanarmsco@frontiernet.net
All American Arms Company
www.galleryofguns.com
VIP Code: AAAC
Veteran Owned and Operated0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
6 comments