Back from Bisley...
Posted: Mon Aug 20, 2018 2:43 am
...And the HBSA long range match last weekend. Saturday was practice day, which was a good idea for me, as it was my 1st time aat LR this year , and the match rifle has a new barrel. I was also taking along some ammo I hadn't tried yet at long range. I actually had 2 loads along for my no.2 Musket match rifle, with a 9-groove gaintwist eichelberger barrel ending at 16" twist:
Load 1:
Reformed Kynoch 500/416 brass
84 grs of Fg Swiss
Thick card wad
540 gr 16:1 L/T groove-dia..450 bullet 1.5" long, faithful copy of the Metford bullet, patched to .458
This load is a proven performer at 300m, but I hadn't shot it yet at 900 and 1,000.
Load 2:
Reformed .470 NE brass
87 gr of 1 1/2Fg Swiss
2 thin card wads
540gr Baco Money bore-dia. PP bullet, 16:1 L/T, .443 bullet patched up to .451
A load which shoots accurately, but at 1st glance, the other load holds the edge at 300m.
Wind satudray was moderate to fresh, a 9 o'clock variable wind on an overcast day. Testing at 900 showed that both loads held promise. Unfortunately, I only could fire a limited number of rounds at 1,000, with not-so-good results.
Match day showed a pretty fresh and gusting 9 o'clock wind, and a start was made with 900 yds. Things went pretty well, except that I got caught out twice, which resulted in 1 miss, and a 1 .
Still, I ended up with a score of 57.2 (out of 75); with which I was pretty happy, as all the other shots were mostly 4 and 5-ring (highest score = 5). This was with load 1, which proved to be a solid performer at 900. Which was why I made the decision to also use it for 1,000
Unfortunately,,1,000 was a disaster: I could barely hold the target, let alone put bullets in the black... I ended with a meagre 33 Was this a load malfunction - but it had performed very well at 900 - , or nut-behind issue? Could also be both...
At any rate, I blew my chance a shooting a good aggregate score. Now for some more searching as to what went wrong. Of course, the load 1 isn't exactly fast (I still have to chrono it though - didn't have a chance to do so), so I'm not excluding it falling apart between 900 and 1,000. But of course, 'nut-behind' is not to be excluded...
Maybe I should have used the other load at 1,000, as it had obviously more oomph - it did shoot 6 MOA lower for an almost identical bullet weight - but that is to be expected with more and faster powder. But that's after the facts of course.
Ah well, the joys of longrange shooting... Some more cogitating, experimenting and frowning to do...
Load 1:
Reformed Kynoch 500/416 brass
84 grs of Fg Swiss
Thick card wad
540 gr 16:1 L/T groove-dia..450 bullet 1.5" long, faithful copy of the Metford bullet, patched to .458
This load is a proven performer at 300m, but I hadn't shot it yet at 900 and 1,000.
Load 2:
Reformed .470 NE brass
87 gr of 1 1/2Fg Swiss
2 thin card wads
540gr Baco Money bore-dia. PP bullet, 16:1 L/T, .443 bullet patched up to .451
A load which shoots accurately, but at 1st glance, the other load holds the edge at 300m.
Wind satudray was moderate to fresh, a 9 o'clock variable wind on an overcast day. Testing at 900 showed that both loads held promise. Unfortunately, I only could fire a limited number of rounds at 1,000, with not-so-good results.
Match day showed a pretty fresh and gusting 9 o'clock wind, and a start was made with 900 yds. Things went pretty well, except that I got caught out twice, which resulted in 1 miss, and a 1 .
Still, I ended up with a score of 57.2 (out of 75); with which I was pretty happy, as all the other shots were mostly 4 and 5-ring (highest score = 5). This was with load 1, which proved to be a solid performer at 900. Which was why I made the decision to also use it for 1,000
Unfortunately,,1,000 was a disaster: I could barely hold the target, let alone put bullets in the black... I ended with a meagre 33 Was this a load malfunction - but it had performed very well at 900 - , or nut-behind issue? Could also be both...
At any rate, I blew my chance a shooting a good aggregate score. Now for some more searching as to what went wrong. Of course, the load 1 isn't exactly fast (I still have to chrono it though - didn't have a chance to do so), so I'm not excluding it falling apart between 900 and 1,000. But of course, 'nut-behind' is not to be excluded...
Maybe I should have used the other load at 1,000, as it had obviously more oomph - it did shoot 6 MOA lower for an almost identical bullet weight - but that is to be expected with more and faster powder. But that's after the facts of course.
Ah well, the joys of longrange shooting... Some more cogitating, experimenting and frowning to do...