Looking for load data to 8mm rem mag and 416 rem mag.

stefan

inthedark wrote:

Hey Stefan
I don't know if you know about this company in South Africa that manufactures high quality bullets at affordable prices ( At least affordable here in Canada ) It is www.frontierbullets.co.za

Frontier Bullets make two lines of bullets: Spartan Series for the 416 and the 8mm in a copper solid that is cnc machined in the following hollow point flat base (short ogive), hollow point boat tail, hollow point flat base (long ogive) and finally the Phalanx which is designed for dangerous game. For the 416 also the gameranger series lead bullets that are electroplated and have a flat meplat designed for slower velocities with maximum damage.

They also make pistol bullets as well and I use the pistol bullets myself and will be ordering the big game bullets from them this summer. I am quite impressed with the quality of their products but you make your own mind up. This is just my opinion.

Chimo (inuktituk)

inthedark

Inthedark Hi!

No, I have not done but I saw the distributors that it is in Sweden as well. I will investigate it further. I'm gonna hear me on the Swedish forum if there are any members who have experience with the ball.

I heard an argument from a member of the copper bullets take too much space inside the sleeve so he used the rather ordinary ball with Blyk type Swift A-frame. He thought it was better to fill up that space with some extra punch instead. What about the argument? Will he right or is he wrong?

slimjim

stefan wrote:

I heard an argument from a member of the copper bullets take too much space inside the sleeve so he used the rather ordinary ball with Blyk type Swift A-frame. He thought it was better to fill up that space with some extra punch instead. What about the argument? Will he right or is he wrong?

I think it depends on the cartridge. An all copper bullet the same size as a lead-copper bullet is lighter (about 20%) and thus can achieve a higher velocity. If you compare both at the same weight, the all copper bullet will be longer and take up powder volume. If the cartridge case is short on powder capacity to begin with, then the argument above proves out. If the case has excess capacity for its caliber, then the all-cooper bullet may not be at a disadvantage. In fact, there may be an advantage as most monolithic bullets come with bands on the side of the bullet, reducing bullet surface area, reducing friction in the bore, reducing pressure. This allows you to load extra grains of powder and achieve higher velocities. As an example, take the 6.8 SPC and the .270 Win which both use the same bullet but have different powder capacities. With the 110gr TSX, the 6.8 looses too much powder capacity and typically won't achieve as high of a muzzle velocity as a 110gr lead-core bullet. In the .270, I have the extra case capacity to load in extra powder compared to a lead-core load and achieve higher velocities without over pressure. My 130 TSX load also faster than a 130 lead-core. That won't be the situation for a 150gr bullet. With the 6.8, step down to a the 85gr TSX and now that bullet-powder charge achieve balance and the 85gr does well in the 6.8.

There is also the arguement that terminal peformance of a lighter all-copper bullet may be equal or better than a heavier lead-core bullet becuase they typically retain the mass on impact. I'm not going to argue this one either way but do believe in the monolithic bullet advantage.

Ominivision1

+1 on what Slim says.

stefan

slimjim wrote:

stefan wrote:

I heard an argument from a member of the copper bullets take too much space inside the sleeve so he used the rather ordinary ball with Blyk type Swift A-frame. He thought it was better to fill up that space with some extra punch instead. What about the argument? Will he right or is he wrong?

I think it depends on the cartridge. An all copper bullet the same size as a lead-copper bullet is lighter (about 20%) and thus can achieve a higher velocity. If you compare both at the same weight, the all copper bullet will be longer and take up powder volume. If the cartridge case is short on powder capacity to begin with, then the argument above proves out. If the case has excess capacity for its caliber, then the all-cooper bullet may not be at a disadvantage. In fact, there may be an advantage as most monolithic bullets come with bands on the side of the bullet, reducing bullet surface area, reducing friction in the bore, reducing pressure. This allows you to load extra grains of powder and achieve higher velocities. As an example, take the 6.8 SPC and the .270 Win which both use the same bullet but have different powder capacities. With the 110gr TSX, the 6.8 looses too much powder capacity and typically won't achieve as high of a muzzle velocity as a 110gr lead-core bullet. In the .270, I have the extra case capacity to load in extra powder compared to a lead-core load and achieve higher velocities without over pressure. My 130 TSX load also faster than a 130 lead-core. That won't be the situation for a 150gr bullet. With the 6.8, step down to a the 85gr TSX and now that bullet-powder charge achieve balance and the 85gr does well in the 6.8.

There is also the arguement that terminal peformance of a lighter all-copper bullet may be equal or better than a heavier lead-core bullet becuase they typically retain the mass on impact. I'm not going to argue this one either way but do believe in the monolithic bullet advantage.

Hi!

Thanks for the account and the lesson! It was interesting reading and then you have hopefully learned something new.

stefan

slimjim wrote:

stefan wrote:

I heard an argument from a member of the copper bullets take too much space inside the sleeve so he used the rather ordinary ball with Blyk type Swift A-frame. He thought it was better to fill up that space with some extra punch instead. What about the argument? Will he right or is he wrong?

I think it depends on the cartridge. An all copper bullet the same size as a lead-copper bullet is lighter (about 20%) and thus can achieve a higher velocity. If you compare both at the same weight, the all copper bullet will be longer and take up powder volume. If the cartridge case is short on powder capacity to begin with, then the argument above proves out. If the case has excess capacity for its caliber, then the all-cooper bullet may not be at a disadvantage. In fact, there may be an advantage as most monolithic bullets come with bands on the side of the bullet, reducing bullet surface area, reducing friction in the bore, reducing pressure. This allows you to load extra grains of powder and achieve higher velocities. As an example, take the 6.8 SPC and the .270 Win which both use the same bullet but have different powder capacities. With the 110gr TSX, the 6.8 looses too much powder capacity and typically won't achieve as high of a muzzle velocity as a 110gr lead-core bullet. In the .270, I have the extra case capacity to load in extra powder compared to a lead-core load and achieve higher velocities without over pressure. My 130 TSX load also faster than a 130 lead-core. That won't be the situation for a 150gr bullet. With the 6.8, step down to a the 85gr TSX and now that bullet-powder charge achieve balance and the 85gr does well in the 6.8.

There is also the arguement that terminal peformance of a lighter all-copper bullet may be equal or better than a heavier lead-core bullet becuase they typically retain the mass on impact. I'm not going to argue this one either way but do believe in the monolithic bullet advantage.

Hi SlimJim!

I found the following test results for Guns & Ammo.
As I interpret these test firings will give Swift A-frame 220 gr. most m / s and impact energy. Now I do not know if I have understood all the text right, but I believe it.

See the link!
www.gunsandammo.com/node/4866/extra
Very Happy

Aloysius

Stefan, be carefull with your conlcusions. Where do you need this bullet's energy: at the muzzle or at the target?
Compare with a cal 12 slug. What's its energy at the muzzle and what its energy f.e. at 200 yards?
A bullet will not gain energy after leaving the muzzle in normal conditions. It will only loose, but how fast is the trick behind lots of different bulletshapes and its raw materials.

stefan

Aloysius wrote:

Stefan, be carefull with your conlcusions. Where do you need this bullet's energy: at the muzzle or at the target?
Compare with a cal 12 slug. What's its energy at the muzzle and what its energy f.e. at 200 yards?
A bullet will not gain energy after leaving the muzzle in normal conditions. It will only loose, but how fast is the trick behind lots of different bulletshapes and its raw materials.

Hi Aloysius!

Yes, I know I have to be careful! A hunting buddy of mine to run this information in the Quick Load so that he can see where the maximum charge is and when he has something to compare with, then he should run the Swift A-frame 220 gr., and Norma MRP powder with federal 215 primer so we'll see what the chart says the maximum load.
The gunpowder factory, we are not in Sweden:

Magnum
MagPro
Re-25, we have no sellers for longer.
It is quite surprising really for Re - gunpowder is manufactured in Sweden.

slimjim

Aloys makes a valid point. The Swift A-frame has a lower BC .(.393 vs .421), thus the Barnes TSX will have a flater trajectory and more energy down range. Plus the all-cooper bullet will have better weight retention on impact, though the A-frame does above average for a lead-core bullet.

stefan

slimjim wrote:

Aloys makes a valid point. The Swift A-frame has a lower BC .(.393 vs .421), thus the Barnes TSX will have a flater trajectory and more energy down range. Plus the all-cooper bullet will have better weight retention on impact, though the A-frame does above average for a lead-core bullet.

Ok! Thanks for your comments!
I am always receptive to all information pertaining to handloading.

slimjim

stefan, not sure this limited data from Barnes is helpful. Their most recent #4 manual will have more data and additional powders. Some others on the forum may be able to give you these additional powders.

www.barnesbullets.com/...numWeb.pdf

I have found the Barnes data is more appropriate for their bullets as they have spent the time to work up loads to stay within pressure limits and still take advantage of their banded bullets.

Sometimes when I want to use use a powder that isn't listed by Barnes, I will compare the powders on Barnes list with another from powder manufacturers, then ratio the powder I'd like to use based on the comparison. I then cautiously work of up own loads based on this comparison. E.g., if the Barnes data typically use 2.0 grains more powder before reaching max pressure, I'll use this to gauge the limits of the alternate powder I'd like to use.

stefan

slimjim wrote:

stefan, not sure this limited data from Barnes is helpful. Their most recent #4 manual will have more data and additional powders. Some others on the forum may be able to give you these additional powders.

www.barnesbullets.com/...numWeb.pdf

I have found the Barnes data is more appropriate for their bullets as they have spent the time to work up loads to stay within pressure limits and still take advantage of their banded bullets.

Sometimes when I want to use use a powder that isn't listed by Barnes, I will compare the powders on Barnes list with another from powder manufacturers, then ratio the powder I'd like to use based on the comparison. I then cautiously work of up own loads based on this comparison. E.g., if the Barnes data typically use 2.0 grains more powder before reaching max pressure, I'll use this to gauge the limits of the alternate powder I'd like to use.

Hi SlimJim!

I've been inside and read on this link, so that I know. I'll keep my eyes open so I get to see when the next guide comes out.

Ok!

I have a list in my computer from VV "Burning Rate Chart" that might help you. It is in PDF format and I'll see if I can upload it. Do you have an email address so you can send an email to bondersbyn @ hotmail.com

www.vihtavuori-lapua.c...-Chart.pdf

I find it on internet, too!

Elvis

both my Nick Harvey and Sierra manuals have loads for these 2 calibers the Nick Harvey has over a page of options for the 8mm mag.if you cant find something that suits I could pm the data to you if needed.

stefan

Elvis wrote:

both my Nick Harvey and Sierra manuals have loads for these 2 calibers the Nick Harvey has over a page of options for the 8mm mag.if you cant find something that suits I could pm the data to you if needed.

I´ve read Sierra manual´s and Nick´s homepage too.

I can buy the book if I have undertand it right.

www.hawkbullets.com/harvey.htm

Yes please! Very Happy

slimjim

stefan, I was able to look up the Barnes load data for the 200 TSX. It uses some pretty standard powders that may be easier for you to obtain. I don't have any other load data for the 8mm RM with like powders to compare it to so I can not derive other loads.

IMR 4350 69.0 - 76.5 gr _ 3014 fps
RL 19 ___ 71.0 - 79.0 gr _ 2998 fps
IMR 4831 72.0 - 79.5 gr _ 3015 fps
XMR 3100 74.5 - 80.0 gr _ 3050 fps
H4831 SC 74.0 - 81.0 gr _ 2967 fps
Mag Pro*_ 80.0 - 88.0 gr _ 3058 fps

* most accurate

stefan

slimjim wrote:

stefan, I was able to look up the Barnes load data for the 200 TSX. It uses some pretty standard powders that may be easier for you to obtain. I don't have any other load data for the 8mm RM with like powders to compare it to so I can not derive other loads.

IMR 4350 69.0 - 76.5 gr _ 3014 fps
RL 19 ___ 71.0 - 79.0 gr _ 2998 fps
IMR 4831 72.0 - 79.5 gr _ 3015 fps
XMR 3100 74.5 - 80.0 gr _ 3050 fps
H4831 SC 74.0 - 81.0 gr _ 2967 fps
Mag Pro*_ 80.0 - 88.0 gr _ 3058 fps

* most accurate

Hi SlimJim!

Thanks for your information. Now I have a bit more to watch.