Good Results With IMR4007ssc

beartracker

I decided to work with IMR4007ssc in my 30-06 Marlin XL7 using my favorite bullet when hunting whitetail deer and hogs, the 165gr HPBT Sierra G/K

My load chain was:
165gr HPBT Sierra G/K
IMR4007ssc
Winchester Brass
Fed 210 Match primer
OAL 3.185"

Results:
Velocity - 2907fps average
Extreme spread - 13
Deviation - 5
Group size for three shots -

Target three shot group
[

Increased the charge by 3/10 of a grain and average was 2938fps five shot group.

Target five shot group with 3/10gr increase.



I liked how this turned out, will use IMR4007ssc with my 06 some more.

NN

nice

beartracker

Yeah, firs time NN I have used IMR4007ssc with a 30-06 and 165gr load, I am keeping this one.

knitepoet

Considering that velocity is faster than Hodgdon's max load with that powder with 165gr bullets (and from a shorter barrel) and Q/L showing that exact bullet/powder combo needs 66,000 + PSI to get your velocity from a 22" barrel... I'm glad it's going off next to YOUR face and not mine :nono:

beartracker

knitepoet wrote: »

Considering that velocity is faster than Hodgdon's max load with that powder with 165gr bullets (and from a shorter barrel) and Q/L showing that exact bullet/powder combo needs 66,000 + PSI to get your velocity from a 22" barrel... I'm glad it's going off next to YOUR face and not mine :nono:

You never cease to amaze me by your limited experience of things because you get most of what you know from reading instead of doing. The top load I used is a near max load from Q/L I am not over book. I am not
over pressure for this rifle and chamber, and extraction is easy and no other pressure signs. This 06 has always exceeded the velocities of my Ruger 22 inch barrel by at least 80fps on the average. Now let me let you go back to reading, which you are good at. I used 62500psi Q/L data not 66,000psi

BigDanS

Those are two hundred yard groups? Impressive! .2 MOA!!!

D

beartracker

BigDanS wrote: »

Those are two hundred yard groups? Impressive! .2 MOA!!!

D

No, they are only 100yds I put the wrong yardage number in the program when measuring the group

knitepoet

beartracker wrote: »

You never cease to amaze me by your limited experience of things because you get most of what you know from reading instead of doing. The top load I used is a near max load from Q/L I am not over book. I am not
over pressure for this rifle and chamber, and extraction is easy and no other pressure signs. This 06 has always exceeded the velocities of my Ruger 22 inch barrel by at least 80fps on the average. Now let me let you go back to reading, which you are good at. I used 62500psi Q/L data not 66,000psi

I would say your arrogance amazes me, but at this point, it no longer does..

Let's see..

Hodgdon shows a max velocity with 165 Sierra BTSP and IMR4007ssc as 2867 from a 24" inch barrel, 40fps slower than YOUR load.....Hmms looks like I was telling the truth there.



QL shows 66290 PSI of pressure giving 2906 fps using the same bullet, powder and barrel length you are..... Hmmmm looks like I was telling the truth on that as well.

If it works for you that's perfectly fine with me. I honestly don't give a furry rat's butt if you decide to load a case chock full of bullseye amd blow yourself to kingdom come (As long as I'm not standing next to you). I stand by my original statement though, I'm glad it's going off next to YOUR face and not MINE.

Got a problem with me having an opinion? Tough teat

beartracker

Well, it appears that my load is close to your estimates and looking back at quick load I obviously did not use the software properly, but fortunately I worked up from 52.5 grains in half grains which I always start low because Q/l is only an estimator and I used other data books to get a starting place, and good thing I do start low with my loads. My top charge ended up being 56.0 grains which looks according to the info well above my desired 62,500psi. With the shallow grooves and lands of the Marlin I obviously build up pressure slower than in my Ruger, good thing. I don't have a problem with your opinions, You and I have always been opinionated. I truly thought you were wrong. You were closer to estimating my pressures than I was and this load even though it does not show up in my brass is obviously over my desire of 62,500 and fortunately not as high as your estimated 66,000psi, but still to high according to the data. Now if you would not mind, and are not to offended by my offensive statements to you, could you give me a near max load using your program and the limit being 62,500psi. I also apologize, you might read a lot, but seems that does give you the right knowledge in this case even above my experience which ain't so good in this case. Please take time to give your opinion again, by giving me a near max or limit when using this powder according to Q/L Thank you

knitepoet

I understand Q/L is only an estimation, which is why I make sure to specify it's from Q/L . They warn you themselves that 10% variations are quite possible due to lot to lot variations in powder, primers etc.

Since I now know what you load is, compared to Hodgdon's max, the pressure is quite possibly right around you 62,500 psi target.

Wife's on the desktop right now, and it's the one I have Q/L on, when she finishes I'll play with the burn rate to match hodgdon's data and see where your load is
. I won't say what the powder charge I redacted that it took to get the 2906 MV was, but suffice it to say it was quite a bit higher than your 56.0gr

beartracker

To Paul and everyone on this forum, my comments to Paul were uncalled for and certainly not needed. I ask all of you to forgive as Paul said, my arrogance in handling this.

Paul, I appreciate you taking the time to send me what you work up. Mike

Zee

beartracker

Ok Zee that is funny, I get it

knitepoet

Accepted :beer:

Matching your load & velocity, Q/L's predicting 67303 psi, but I'm also using the default COAL and case capacity. :uhm:

I SERIOUSLY doubt that the 0.1gr you're above Hodgdon's load can generate the additional 9,003psi Q/L is saying you're generating.
So using Hodgdon's published MEASURED pressure as a baseline, you're probablyright around your 62,500 limit (more or less.)

Since Q/L isn't wanting to come anywhere close to Hodgdon's actual data with its estimates, I really can't give a suggested max based on it.

edited to add: Using the Q/L default, it predicts your load generates only 57,457 psi pressure, but it also only predicts 2779 fps MV from a 22" bbl

So I can't get generate much confidence in it knowing what your load is, Hodgdon's max load and their MEASURED pressure is

beartracker

Well, I am left with going to my gunsmith friend and have him install a pressure gauge and we will test fire a round at 56.0 and see what ball park it is in. I am now curious and want to know. Fortunately he does this for free because we have been friends for years. I called him at home and he said bring it to him in the morning since he open until 12 noon and when he is ready Monday or Tuesday I will go and we will fire it. I think in doing so it will benefit us in comparing the reality against our estimation. Thanks for trying, I will let you all know the results.

beartracker

Hey thanks for the PM and I sent you two of them.

Paul, I deleted the real dangerous load list that I sent you on PM in this public post and here is what I came up with when I did it and my barrel is really fast. Also, I will be checking out my chronograph by bring my other one and comparing. Lord I hope it is not off, but I will see.


Cartridge : .30-06 Spring. (SAAMI)
Bullet : .308, 165, Sierra HPBT 2140
Useable Case Capaci: 62.677 grain H2O = 4.070 cm³
Cartridge O.A.L. L6: 3.340 inch = 84.84 mm
Barrel Length : 22.0 inch = 558.8 mm
Powder : IMR 4007 SSC

Predicted data by increasing and decreasing the given charge,
incremented in steps of 2.0% of nominal charge.
CAUTION: Figures exceed maximum and minimum recommended loads !

Step Fill. Charge Vel. Energy Pmax Pmuz Prop.Burnt B_Time
% % Grains fps ft.lbs psi psi % ms

-20.0 77 45.36 2251 1856 31565 8043 86.9 1.437
-18.0 79 46.49 2307 1949 33626 8306 88.2 1.400
-16.0 81 47.63 2362 2044 35817 8564 89.4 1.365
-14.0 83 48.76 2418 2142 38147 8816 90.5 1.327
-12.0 85 49.90 2474 2242 40626 9062 91.6 1.287
-10.0 87 51.03 2529 2344 43263 9301 92.6 1.249
-08.0 89 52.16 2585 2448 46071 9531 93.6 1.212
-06.0 91 53.30 2641 2555 49061 9752 94.5 1.177
-04.0 93 54.43 2697 2664 52248 9964 95.4 1.143 ! Near Maximum !
-02.0 95 55.57 2752 2776 55646 10165 96.1 1.110 ! Near Maximum !
+00.0 97 56.70 2808 2889 59274 10354 96.8 1.078 ! Near Maximum !
+02.0 99 57.83 2864 3005 63150 10532 97.5 1.047 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!

Results caused by ± 10% powder lot-to-lot burning rate variation using nominal charge
Data for burning rate increased by 10% relative to nominal value:
+Ba 97 56.70 2936 3159 69526 10337 99.7 1.003 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Data for burning rate decreased by 10% relative to nominal value:
-Ba 97 56.70 2642 2557 49257 9940 90.5 1.175

knitepoet

It will be quite educational seeing what the strain gauge shows :up:

beartracker

Yes, I am highly curious now, it will be interesting indeed.

mbmm

Not that it has anything to do with this discussion, I use the same powder for my 220 swift and have used it for years and am very happy with it.. For what it is worth.

knitepoet

Got the results yet?
:popcorn:

Ernie Bishop

I am glad the fireworks are finished.
Isn't that why you fight so you can kiss and make up?
Just be glad you're shooting Mike.
I don't feel good enough to do that, but I'm getting there.
I need to get quick load one of these days, it seems like a really cool program.

beartracker

He will not be free to do it until tomorrow afternoon and I will post results tomorrow evening.

Razorbacker

beartracker wrote: »

He will not be free to do it until tomorrow afternoon and I will post results tomorrow evening.

I have followed this thread and look forward to your results. I've read here and elsewhere many times that quickload was off base. Real world results are what counts in my book.

tennmike

If you have the spare change, one of these would be a useful tool when working up a load at the high end of the load data. I'd like one, but can't justify the purchase. I only load at the 'pedestrian' level at the low to middle of the data. The equipment sure has a lot of data available and many features that would give nice to know information, though.

http://www.shootingsoftware.com/mm5/merchant.mvc?Screen=CTGY&Store_Code=RSI&Category_Code=PT

knitepoet

Ernie Bishop wrote: »

I am glad the fireworks are finished.
Isn't that why you fight so you can kiss and make up?

Wasn't a "fight" I just voiced an opinion.

Last time I checked, that's allowed here isn't it?

snake284

tennmike wrote: »

If you have the spare change, one of these would be a useful tool when working up a load at the high end of the load data. I'd like one, but can't justify the purchase. I only load at the 'pedestrian' level at the low to middle of the data. The equipment sure has a lot of data available and many features that would give nice to know information, though.

http://www.shootingsoftware.com/mm5/merchant.mvc?Screen=CTGY&Store_Code=RSI&Category_Code=PT

I could almost justify one of those Tennmike. There's at least one load I would love to know about. Actually, I COULD justify it, but I don't have the change now. Not this time of year. But it is interesting.

Ernie Bishop

Of course it is.

knitepoet wrote: »

Last time I checked, that's allowed here isn't it?

knitepoet

beartracker wrote: »

He will not be free to do it until tomorrow afternoon and I will post results tomorrow evening.

:popcorn:

beartracker

Robert has run the test, I am tied up in counseling and he text me the results.

165gr Sierra HPBT
56.0grs IMR4007ssc
59,189psi
2848fps he said my chrony is off on the average of 59fps (will check this again at the range and compare to my back up crony)

I can live with this load if it is 2848fps and my back up verifies Roberts chrony findings.

knitepoet

2848 with a 165 gr bullet is still nothing to sneeze at. Unlike a 270 I doubt it bounces off much :jester:

beartracker

Yes, it will do and I am leaving this load where it is. I do like this IMR4007ssc and also my extreme spread and deviation were low. If it bounces off anything I am hunting, I will take my dad's advice when he said, "It is a poor set of feet that stands around and takes abuse.":that: