Reloading can be dangerous and scary if you don't do it right.

Thanks. I don't think you can really compare the two 6.5mm rounds. The Swedish case is much larger than the Mannlicher. The Swede comes in at 57.9 grains of H2O capacity, the Mannlicher as only 44.5. The Swede is much larger in diameter as well as length.
I agree. Please see my previous post and go here for the Nosler loading information.


I think if you do a bit of math and take into account your smaller case, I believe you'll conclude the numbers you started with are significantly too high for the charge weights.
 
I agree. Please see my previous post and go here for the Nosler loading information.


I think if you do a bit of math and take into account your smaller case, I believe you'll conclude the numbers you started with are significantly too high for charge weights.
I get it. I'm just telling you what the published load is in the Hornady manual, and what the load info I received from both VV and Woodleigh. If those published (hardcover books) loads aren't safe, I don't know what is.
 
I get it. I'm just telling you what the published load is in the Hornady manual, and what the load info I received from both VV and Woodleigh. If those published (hardcover books) loads aren't safe, I don't know what is.

Gotcha, that is concerning.
 
Any chance the bullet set back into the case when chambering?
Should be able to feel loose or tight neck tension when seating bullets.
 
So, mistakes were made. Others will be blamed.

This is going to get a bit long, so have a beer and kick back.

My first mistake is trying to find a load for a powder that doesn't have a published load for it. Second mistake is using bullets for the load that doesn't have a powder listed for it.

So here's the rest of the story.

Cartridge in question is 6.5X54 Mannlicher Schönauer.

There are few published loads for this, and most revolve around IMR. That's probably the way to go. The main problem with that, however, is when powders are scarce, IMR is one of the first ones to go. So go to the back up plan.

I like Vihta Vouri powders. Not as many people use them, and so they tend to be available when others are out. Additionally, it's temperature stable, and burns very clean. I thought N160 would be the way to go, and contacting the tech guys at VV, they confirmed that they had not tested a load, N160 would probably be their first choice for the cartridge.

I'd also like to try Norma powders, because Norma has published loads for their Oryx bullet, but I can't find Norma 204 or MRP (their recommended) anywhere.

But I do have QuickLoad, right?

I also have four bullets I'd like to try. The Oryx 156 grain would be a good hunting bullet, and I can finally find Hornady 160 grain RNSP locally. I also have in my collection 100 Woodleigh 160 grain RNSP and 50 160 grain Protected Point.

I'd really like to get the Oryx and Protected Point bullets working. The RNSP bullets are awesome out to about 100m or so. But muzzle velocity starts at only around 2200fps. And they lose velocity quickly, because they are not very aerodynamic. A spitzer type bullet would retain velocity much better.

Off topic now, but real world example. When I was in Germany, the requirement for Hochwild was minimum 6.5mm caliber, and 2000 joules of energy at 100m. There is a similar requirement in Poland. An RNSP bullet meets the minimum caliber, but only hits around 1950 joules at 100m. A more ballistically efficient bullet could take 2000 joules out to 150 to 200 meters. There's also a great deal of bullet drop, and you're probably not going to reach out and touch a Gams at 300m, even though that's what the rifle was designed to do. So that's why I'd like to get the Oryx or PP round working.

FWIW, conversations with Woodleigh indicate the load for their RNSP and PP bullets should be similar, but that's not important right now.

I do have Quickload. So I started noodling some loads. Now, YES, I know that's only a start. So what I did was map out the pressures for some published loads from the manuals I have, and compared that to proposed N160 loads to try and stay safe. QuickLoad will tell you when you approach max pressure, and I did NOT want to go there. My initial loads "matched" the plotted initial loads for IMR, Norma 204, and Norma MRP. Nothing crazy. Max pressure (CIP) is about 52,000 psi, and everything I plotted was well short of that.

One point on the different bullets: They all have to be loaded to different lengths to fit in the magazine, but no loads were compressed loads. All my "min" loads were around an 80% case load, and max loads were less than 86%. Burn in the barrel was between 92% and 98%. Not fully efficient, but it is a short barrel, and a hotter powder would have other issues, like a faster pressure spike.

All brass was unfired Norma, primers were Federal Match. Bullets were loaded to a length that fit the magazine, and had a great deal of jump to the lands. Maybe not perfect for accuracy, but no chance of jam.
So first up was the Oryx. I started low, and worked up to 37 grains. Got about 2100 fps (QL predicted 2200), and absolutely no pressure signs. I could probably go higher, but I don't think I need to. QL did say I could go higher, but again, not sure I need. May check for accuracy, and tweak. But that works.

Next up was the Hornady. QL also said 37 grains was safe, and I could probably go higher. QL predicted about 2100 fps, but my Labradar says only 1950 or so. No pressure signs. Hornady has a cannelure, but I was beneath it (a little long, but shorter than the book COAL of 3.063). The reason for long is the MS feed ramp likes a long bullet, and loading at the cannelure is a sure way to jam things up when you work the bolt.

Good so far. A little slow, but good.

Now the Woodleigh RNSPs. They look a lot like the Hornadys. There's a bit more lead at the point, and a bit blunter than the Hornady, and unlike the Hornady, there is no cannelure. All bullets were lightly taper crimped.

QL says a good starting safe load was 34.5 grains. The pressure curve roughly matched the Norma MRP. Labradar reported 2200 fps. NO pressure signs. I checked with my 10X loupe, it was not a casual glance. No bolt marks on the base, primer solidly seated, bolt opened easily.

I should have stopped there, right?

Next up was 34.8 grains. Only 0.3 of a grain increase. Maybe I might get a slightly stiff bolt lift if I was getting too much.

Wrong.

Velocity was a nice 2250 or so.

The bolt was stuck tight. Not "oh, this is a little stiff", but pound on it with a piece of wood to get it open tight. Not only was the primer completely gone, the case itself was totally trashed. To the point where I turned a rimless case into a rimmed case. No ruptures, thank God, and the rifle is fine, though perhaps I can say it was newly proofed. But that 0.3 grains was a huge increase.

I stopped there. I never tried the PP. I'm going to dump powder and start over.

I guess my two choices are to just play with the Oryx, which makes sense because they are certainly more available than Woodleighs, and just abandon the PPs, or back off to 33 grains, and stop before 34.2. For the PPs, go a little lighter, maybe start at 32.5 or 33. The PP bullet is about an eighth of an inch longer than the RNSP bullet, so that's a lot of friction in the barrel.

Truth be told, 2200 fps from the carbine barrel with 160 grains of RNSP should be effective on most things in North America. and I have no plans to do a WDM Bell and go elephant hunting with it. I am concerned about using 270 grain Woodleighs in my 9.5X57, but I have about 300 Hornady bullets to play with first.

The bottom line, if you've made it this far, is 0.3 grains can make a huge difference, even if it's well within what QuickLoad predicts.

Thank you for coming to my Ted Talk.

No insights to add to your very interesting post, but I do have a question.

Did you measure the fired brass and compare it to the unfired? Could you have been getting excessive stretch of the cases as well? I'm just curious if there could have been other pressure signs beyond the seemingly a-okay primers in your first few loads.

Just a comment about the 6.5x54MS even though I've not loaded for it personally. I know its extremely fickle for its OAL because of its original design to feed from the MS rotary magazine system. Could seating depth be a contributing factor to increased pressure leading to what you observed?

At any rate, good Ted Talk and was worth the admission.
 
All cases were new, never fired Norma.

I do have an insight after all. If you full length sized all the new brass, is that an issue? Could you pull the firing pin on your rifle, slip in an unsized new brass and try to turn down the bolt? Bump back the shoulder only enough that you feel you're compressing the brass for the last 2-3 degrees of bolt rotation.

Load one round of that as described above, reinstall your firing pin, set up the same experiment as either good load you mentioned, compare the results to see if they are the same velocity.

Reason: to rule out the potential that the chamber is not to spec and full length sized new brass has excessive headspace that may be the culprit.
 
I do have an insight after all. If you full length sized all the new brass, is that an issue? Could you pull the firing pin on your rifle, slip in an unsized new brass and try to turn down the bolt? Bump back the shoulder only enough that you feel you're compressing the brass for the last 2-3 degrees of bolt rotation.

Load one round of that as described above, reinstall your firing pin, set up the same experiment as either good load you mentioned, compare the results to see if they are the same velocity.

Reason: to rule out the potential that the chamber is not to spec and full length sized new brass has excessive headspace that may be the culprit.
Thanks. I did not full length size the brand new case. I did, however, measure/compare it to a New Old Stock, unfired, RWS case. Headspace/chamber has been checked on both of my M1903s. Also checked using the "tape method" on a case.

One of the reasons I decided to go with the new brass instead of my once fired brass is to rule out having set the shoulder too far back.

Also, YES YES YES on the MS being fickle with COAL. That's why I didn't set the Hornady to the cannelure, as I know that that far back means "won't feed". At the same time, I measured jump (and you need a lot of jump to get to the lands) and measured magazine.

For the record, MAX COAL is 3.063, I was at 3.047. Those 16 thousandths made sure the rounds fit in the magazines, because a bit of lead sticking out of the RNSP can sometimes catch in the magazine as it spins around. One of my steps in cartridge prep/die setting is to load five rounds and ensure all five spin in and then spin out when you hit the "unload" button. It still keeps the rounds in the neck of the case, and does not protrude far into the shoulder. FWIW, QL uses seating depth to compute cartridge capacity, so if you seat farther in, the pressure curve changes. Something to keep an eye on. One thing I did afterwards was see how far of a seating depth it would require to get to Pmax, and that took a COAL of like 2.75 or something crazy, so I'm pretty sure it wasn't that.

What I'm really starting to wonder: Harder/thicker jacket+tight, good rifling could = higher pressure, yes? This is why the same charge pushed one bullet at 1900, and another at 2200fps. Right now, that's the only answer I have, but I really don't have a way to measure jacket hardness.

Later today, if/when I have time I will try and get some photos.
 
Thanks. I did not full length size the brand new case. I did, however, measure/compare it to a New Old Stock, unfired, RWS case. Headspace/chamber has been checked on both of my M1903s. Also checked using the "tape method" on a case.

One of the reasons I decided to go with the new brass instead of my once fired brass is to rule out having set the shoulder too far back.

Also, YES YES YES on the MS being fickle with COAL. That's why I didn't set the Hornady to the cannelure, as I know that that far back means "won't feed". At the same time, I measured jump (and you need a lot of jump to get to the lands) and measured magazine.

For the record, MAX COAL is 3.063, I was at 3.047. Those 16 thousandths made sure the rounds fit in the magazines, because a bit of lead sticking out of the RNSP can sometimes catch in the magazine as it spins around. One of my steps in cartridge prep/die setting is to load five rounds and ensure all five spin in and then spin out when you hit the "unload" button. It still keeps the rounds in the neck of the case, and does not protrude far into the shoulder. FWIW, QL uses seating depth to compute cartridge capacity, so if you seat farther in, the pressure curve changes. Something to keep an eye on. One thing I did afterwards was see how far of a seating depth it would require to get to Pmax, and that took a COAL of like 2.75 or something crazy, so I'm pretty sure it wasn't that.

What I'm really starting to wonder: Harder/thicker jacket+tight, good rifling could = higher pressure, yes? This is why the same charge pushed one bullet at 1900, and another at 2200fps. Right now, that's the only answer I have, but I really don't have a way to measure jacket hardness.

Later today, if/when I have time I will try and get some photos.


Pursuant to your current line of thinking, I wonder if these old guns may have a hernia in the barrel from lapping? If you have pin gauges, it would be interesting to drop them down the chamber and the muzzle to see if they stick at a particular point? That could explain pressure spike and may suggest you want a slightly smaller bullet.

I've found many times on vintage guns that the bore diameters are all over the place at various spots in the barrel and not always from wear or erosion, sometimes they were born that way.
 
How about neck tension?
Actually what I'm wondering is when chambering a round, if that 160 RNSP bullet was driven back into the case.

I had one rifle (AR15 gas gun, not a bolt action) that If I reloaded heavy 68 - 77 grain bullets it would shoot some fine and drive others back into the case. It would shoot a good group at 400 yards then out of the blue drop one in the dirt in front of the target.

It made for a very miserable SOF match way back when. Finally jammed during the match and I could see the problem. No cannelaure and crimping - light or heavy - made no difference at all. (I had almost 1k loaded that I tried crimping after the fact.)

As a result I will load a few dummies when trying different bullets and hard chamber several times as a test in any semi-auto. I also measure neck tension.

You mentioned that the 6.5x54 would not feed properly unless the COL was just right.
 
How about neck tension?
Actually what I'm wondering is when chambering a round, if that 160 RNSP bullet was driven back into the case.

I had one rifle (AR15 gas gun, not a bolt action) that If I reloaded heavy 68 - 77 grain bullets it would shoot some fine and drive others back into the case. It would shoot a good group at 400 yards then out of the blue drop one in the dirt in front of the target.

It made for a very miserable SOF match way back when. Finally jammed during the match and I could see the problem. No cannelaure and crimping - light or heavy - made no difference at all. (I had almost 1k loaded that I tried crimping after the fact.)

As a result I will load a few dummies when trying different bullets and hard chamber several times as a test in any semi-auto. I also measure neck tension.

You mentioned that the 6.5x54 would not feed properly unless the COL was just right.
Yes, thanks. That's part of the "load 5 dummies and make sure they cycle through the mag. Pressing the button shows they spin well, but chambering each ensures they hit the feed ramp correctly.
 
Did you chronograph a factory load?
Individual rifles vary and the factory loads will give you a good baseline to compare to.
Yes, the RWS rounds usually hit between 2150 and 2200fps. The unfortunate thing is it's difficult to tell if they've degraded at all since they were built. For my 9.5 I was surprised once to find soft brass and cordite (!) inside.
 
Pursuant to your current line of thinking, I wonder if these old guns may have a hernia in the barrel from lapping? If you have pin gauges, it would be interesting to drop them down the chamber and the muzzle to see if they stick at a particular point? That could explain pressure spike and may suggest you want a slightly smaller bullet.

I've found many times on vintage guns that the bore diameters are all over the place at various spots in the barrel and not always from wear or erosion, sometimes they were born that way.
I've been thinking about this. You make a valid point, but I don't think that's the case here.

My reasoning is this:
My NOS RWS rounds do not have this problem. If there was a tight spot, it would have shown up there as well.

Ditto the Hornady and Oryx rounds. They were fine, it wasn't until I went to the Woodleigh that I had an issue.

The primers were the same in all cases, so I'm ruling out primers.

The cases were all trimmed equally.

So I have several possibilities:

My powder load was inaccurate. That is to say, I thought I loaded a specific rate, but misread the scale, etc. This is possible, of course, but I doubt it was likely.

There was something unnoticed in the case that reduced case capacity.

There was something off with neck tension. Not likely, but possible.

Jacket hardness affected pressure required to move the bullet down the barrel.

I know both VV and Woodleigh said I could match the Hornady IMR loads listed in their books. From that, I backed off a little less than 10% for a starting load, but still got a spike.

Only thing left is to pull bullets and check. Range isn't open again until Friday, so I have a few days.
 
Wow! That's pretty harsh, isn't it?
That is a bit "over the top"
Totally agree with your sentiment.
I have learnt far more from my mistakes than any other experiences.
Thirty years ago I also overloaded my 280AI, but you learn and move on.
The worst outcome would be to stop your learning and buy factory ammo.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
60,084
Messages
1,249,259
Members
109,930
Latest member
Nervozen
 

 

 

Latest profile posts

Just Finished a great Buffalo and plains game combo hunt , pictures to follow soon!
MooseHunter wrote on Tyguy's profile.
Im interested in the Zeiss Scope. Any nicks or dings? Good and clear? I have on and they are great scopes
Available Game 2025!

White Wildebeest.
 
Top