![]() I've used RL17 in only one caliber (successfully) and reports seem to be mixed, but as I have some, I think I will at least run some through the chrono, although my preference would be H4350 or H4831. Maybe hasn't found it's way to any other source as yet. I just used H4350.ĭchamp, the RL17 load was listed in something issued by Hornady specifically relating to the ELD-x. 222 barrel so did not experiment too much. I've shot it out of my BD14 30-06 barrel and it was accurate enough but I could not regulate it to the. I wold think the 200 ELD-X would perform extremely well on close range shoulder shots. Also I have observed very similar performance from the Berger VLD in the field, on game when impact velocities would be around 2,000 fps, little or no expansion and wild detours in the penetration path. However, I don't think the lower rotational velocity would translate to a difference in the jacket rupture or expansion. This would possibly result in a straighter path while penetrating than the lower rotational velocity of my tests. The bullet would retain a higher rotational velocity and may be more stable. It is quite possible that my testing using reduced loads to simulate impacts at long range is a more difficult test than if the bullet had been fired at high velocity and slowed down to the impact velocity naturally. Secondtry wrote:One thing that Bob may be able to comment on is the possible reduction in rotational speed at impact, and consequent reduction in expansion, when low impact speeds are simulated by loading to a much reduced muzzle velocity ? One thing that Bob may be able to comment on is the possible reduction in rotational speed at impact, and consequent reduction in expansion, when low impact speeds are simulated by loading to a much reduced muzzle velocity ? My initial seat of the pants thought would have been H4350 or H4831sc, but I'm happy to try any powder that I currently have. Hornady loading data is limited (without shelling out for their new manual) but shows RL17 as being a candidate. I don't have any first hand experience with the Bergers yet, but Bob's experiments and the Hornady publicity guff suggest to me that I should aim for an impact velocity of not less than 2000fps, whereas I had been thinking 1800 would be reliable. Target will be only Sambar with this load. If that was the case, the moderate velocity and the heavy for calibre weight should make it a safe bet for shoulder shots at short range, and that the design of the bullet and the B/C could make it pretty useful out to maybe 400yds or a bit further. Thinking that in that 06 barrell 2600fps may be doable. ![]() As I can't be bothered finding out the hard way that, in my rifles, it may not be, I'll go with the 200. Hornady have advised me that the 200 should be fine in an 11 twist and that the 212 may be or may not be. I looked at the 178, but it seems to offer no practical advantage over more conventional 180s such as the Accubond. (might also use it in 300wm instead of the 210 Berger) Just a bit of mental exercise here, but I am attracted to the idea of using this bullet in a 26''/11" twist.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |