3006 load development

[Dick284]

[QUOTE=gunluvr;4437953]

Originally Posted by brewster29

Yup. First thing I would try is any brass other than Federal. IMHO it’s the worst.

Have you sorted your brass by weight? A friend gave me a bunch of Federal brass to reload for his 270. It may have come from more than one lot but out of 35 pieces the lightest is 192.6 gr. and the heaviest is 200.3 gr.
To me that's a huge difference, and would likely lead to a significant velocity inconsistency between loads of the same powder charge.
When developing a load, I like to keep all brass within 2 or 3 grains at most.

Unless you are going to uniform the neck thickness, uniform primer pocket depth, and deburr the flashholes, weight sorting does next to nothing…. Less than 10 grains variation in case to case weight is nothing. Chasing a feel good notion is all you’re doing, it’s not a match rifle, remember.

[Pathfinder76]

1/2” at 100 yards will absolutely not happen in many rifles. Ever. If you are just interested in ringing steel at 800 yards, a 1” gun will do that easily. Get Lapua brass, good dies, strive for consistent neck tension, and a reasonable SD and you are likely going to meet your goal. You absolutely do not need to weight sort brass, uniform primer pockets, deburr flash holes or turn necks.

[Arty]

Originally Posted by Duramaximos

[...]
The monte carlo stock isn't helping. Considering changing it out to a straight comb synthetic to help reduce the muzzle jump.

[...]

The stock has to be fit correctly, including LOP and a comb appropriately high to get a good 'cheek weld' for aiming consistency and to avoid getting slapped in the face or having to twist your neck down into a pretzl. The shoulder pocket to the cheek distance has to be correct, as well as from the cheek to the eye. Finishing it with a material that's a little softer than a baseball bat helps too.

IMO a (non-adjustable) monte carlo stock is a generic attempt to fit a stock better to a shooter but probably fails for most. It attempts to drop the heel while keeping the cheek contact reasonably high but not high enough. Better would be to get an adjustable McMillan A5, or Master Class 'highpower match' adjustable, which might be considered an adjustable MC stock.

Another complication is the comb has to be adjustable back down enough to be able to pull out the bolt in many rifles. A fixed MC stock custom-turned for you might work on a shotgun action, but not a rifle for that reason. So that limits the flexibility to actually have a non-adjustable MC stock fit a specific person. Adjustables are the way to go, unless you really luck out with a generic MC, Bavarian, or straight stock.

[catnthehat]

Originally Posted by Arty

The stock has to be fit correctly, including LOP and a comb appropriately high to get a good 'cheek weld' for aiming consistency and to avoid getting slapped in the face or having to twist your neck down into a pretzl. The shoulder pocket to the cheek distance has to be correct, as well as from the cheek to the eye. Finishing it with a material that's a little softer than a baseball bat helps too.

IMO a (non-adjustable) monte carlo stock is a generic attempt to fit a stock better to a shooter but probably fails for most. It attempts to drop the heel while keeping the cheek contact reasonably high but not high enough. Better would be to get an adjustable McMillan A5, or Master Class 'highpower match' adjustable, which might be considered an adjustable MC stock.

Another complication is the comb has to be adjustable back down enough to be able to pull out the bolt in many rifles. A fixed MC stock custom-turned for you might work on a shotgun action, but not a rifle for that reason. So that limits the flexibility to actually have a non-adjustable MC stock fit a specific person. Adjustables are the way to go, unless you really luck out with a generic MC, Bavarian, or straight stock.

I would never consider putting a match rifle stock on a hunting rifle, or even an adjustable stock, they are generally heavier , and IMO not at all suited for general hunting

I have never had much issue at all fitting a stock for myself or someone else, it is not a complicated matter.
However, it was also noted in the OP that the rifle was apparently shooting tight with factory ammo , so stock fit would not be an issue.
Cat

[Arty]

Originally Posted by catnthehat

I would never consider putting a match rifle stock on a hunting rifle, or even an adjustable stock, they are generally heavier , and IMO not at all suited for general hunting

I have never had much issue at all fitting a stock for myself or someone else, it is not a complicated matter.
However, it was also noted in the OP that the rifle was apparently shooting tight with factory ammo , so stock fit would not be an issue.
Cat

A bit heavier is steadier and works just fine for me. It also balances out a heavier barrel better. An A5 has been on my 'go to' rifle for a lot of years and works great for general hunting. It's also much stronger and more stable than something carved out of walnut. I would guess a HP match type stock might be even more suited for field shooting from a multitude of positions.

An adjustable stock is of course designed to achieve a good fit with less bother than strapping, taping, screwing or carving bits onto some mass-produced stock. So it's least complicated of all. The whole stock thing came up because the OP detected some deficiency he wanted to correct. If it was perfect, that would not have been brought up.

[catnthehat]

Originally Posted by Arty

A bit heavier is steadier and works just fine for me. It also balances out a heavier barrel better. An A5 has been on my 'go to' rifle for a lot of years and works great for general hunting. It's also much stronger and more stable than something carved out of walnut. I would guess a HP match type stock might be even more suited for field shooting from a multitude of positions.

An adjustable stock is of course designed to achieve a good fit with less bother than strapping, taping, screwing or carving bits onto some mass-produced stock. So it's least complicated of all. The whole stock thing came up because the OP detected some deficiency he wanted to correct. If it was perfect, that would not have been brought up.

The OP also mentioned he can already shoot 3/4" with factory loads.
Dumpling aa pile of money into a stock change will not change a hand load.
However if he wants to do that well, that is up to him.

Cat

[manitou210]

https://www.nosler.com/media/wysiwyg...ersion-9-0.jpg

IMR 4350

[Ariu]

Originally Posted by Duramaximos

Hello all,

... I know the rifle has good potential. 3/4" groups with factory Fusion 165 gr ammo....

You know that the rifle can shot these rounds. Try to mimic them.
165gn accubonds loaded at similar speed as factory loads. Once you find the node, you can than play with seating depth, primers, different brass…

If you change the bullets, is a totally different load.
In my experience TTSX likes speed. I tried IMR4350, Win760 and RL17 and they all performed best with speeds north of 3000fps. Optimal seating depth at 0.04" and I was noting a group opening at 0.05"

On the same gun, 150gn HDY SST bullets, performed best at 2800fps at 0.002" jump.

good luck

[JeanCretien]

Some fellows have already mentioned this, I’ve had the same experience, I changed the OAL a bunch with a decent load and presto, it was an exponential return. It was funny- very fleeting. It didn’t change slowly, it was either perfect or normal. The crimp seemed to effect it a little too. Good luck!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[aardvaark]

You wouldn’t be the first person to find that Federal ammo, whether fusion or blue box, is the most accurate ammo they can get or make for their particular rifle. And others will say it’s the worst.

Your rifle likes that combo. And you’ve proven it.

And this is why we reload. To make the best, better. 3/4” moa is not bad AT ALL for any rifle. Yes, you can possibly make it better. But be prepared to spend an awful lot of time, money and frustration trying to make it better. And you might NOT even succeed in making it better, after all of that.

I bought an older Tikka M695 in 300WM earlier this year. The PO had only ever shot factory ammo with it, and said it always shot very well. So I made up a ladder batch with the first combo I came up with and it shot the first three rounds at just over 1/4 moa. So how can I improve on that? I’m not even going to try. But I’m enjoying playing with it to see what other bullets and powders shoot as well or nearly as well in it.

Another case, I bought a brand new CZ527. There are countless articles on how well these rifles shoot. But mine doesn’t. The only thing consistent with it is it shoots everything at around 2.” Until I tried it at .005 off the lands. Then the groups tightened up to just under .5”. But now I can’t use the mag, and it is the worst gun ever to single shot feed. Best part of that gun? It’s really pretty.

My point? Welcome to reloading and shooting. Win some, lose some, enjoy the hobby.

If this was me? Above, manitou posted a link that takes you to Nosler’s book. Go with the “most accurate powder tested” load. Which is IMR 4350. Get the best group you can on your ladder batch. And then, using that powder charge, try different coal’s until you find one that tightens up. And then, using that coal, go up and down on your powder weight by .3gr and you might or might not find another improvement. And don’t worry about speed till you’re finished. The only reason I use for finding the speed of my bullet is to develop a trajectory chart.

[kevpack]

I'm not the be all and end all expert but my Husqvarna just loves 180 grain sierra bullets. Not a fast load, 2742 fps average but shoots great and it never shot at anything it didn't kill. Sorry for the target, this is a photocopy taken years ago.