Saubier.com  



Go Back   Saubier.com > Saubier.com Forums > Small Caliber Discussion Board

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 11-16-2014, 03:22 AM
SS427 SS427 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: PNW
Posts: 136
Default

Pdog - that is exactly what I have in mind at this point including the barrel length. I like left port right eject actions, but this one will probably be a right bolt right port right eject because that is what my Cooper is. I was going to use a McMillian hunter style bench rest stock. What stock do you have in mind?

Sounds like I might be hosed for seeing my hits though the scope.

Interesting what everyone is saying about magnification. Last year I was using 8-32x, 6-24x and 5-20x scopes and I had them all on near max magnification during my sage rat hunt. All three days were clear and I was facing into the sun with little to no wind. I was pretty much done shooting each day by noon or 1:00 though. Maybe I just avoided the mirage problems.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 11-16-2014, 05:09 AM
Nor Cal Mikie Nor Cal Mikie is offline
Supporting Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: 125 miles North of San Francisco.
Posts: 1,104
Default

At 100 yards, seeing your hits is a lost cause. Anything past that distance will give the rig a chance to settle back down. And lower magnification helps too.
I'am working with a 15 + pound rig set up for bench shooting and am running a 36 fixed power scope. Seeing hits is a waste of time. 200 + yards gives you a much better chance.
I went as far as building a 20 VT "Short" ( less powder = less recoil ) by pushing the shoulder back .200. I can ALMOST see the hits thru the scope. Anything past that distance and you can see the holes forming.

You have to take into consideration what you have planned for the rig.
Pack it out to a shooting spot and go for it. Pack it around all day and a "heavy" gun will wear you out.
If your plan is a dedicated bench shooter, 20 + pound range would be good.
And a straight pipe will help with the extra needed weight. Think laminated fence post for a stock. Theres the extra weight needed.
Or, go 17 VHA and be done with it. Mine is in the works.
7 to 8 grains of powder verses 18 to 20 will get the job done.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 11-16-2014, 08:16 AM
MFG_BOP MFG_BOP is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 20
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nor Cal Mikie View Post
At 100 yards, seeing your hits is a lost cause. Anything past that distance will give the rig a chance to settle back down. And lower magnification helps too.
I'am working with a 15 + pound rig set up for bench shooting and am running a 36 fixed power scope. Seeing hits is a waste of time. 200 + yards gives you a much better chance.
I went as far as building a 20 VT "Short" ( less powder = less recoil ) by pushing the shoulder back .200. I can ALMOST see the hits thru the scope. Anything past that distance and you can see the holes forming.

You have to take into consideration what you have planned for the rig.
Pack it out to a shooting spot and go for it. Pack it around all day and a "heavy" gun will wear you out.
If your plan is a dedicated bench shooter, 20 + pound range would be good.
And a straight pipe will help with the extra needed weight. Think laminated fence post for a stock. Theres the extra weight needed.
Or, go 17 VHA and be done with it. Mine is in the works.
7 to 8 grains of powder verses 18 to 20 will get the job done.
Nor Cal, doing roughly my measurements, if you set your shoulder back .143" of a Vartarg, you will have a scaled down version of the 6PPC. Did you have this in mind to build a 20VT short or was it for something else? Cheers
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 11-16-2014, 01:44 PM
Nor Cal Mikie Nor Cal Mikie is offline
Supporting Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: 125 miles North of San Francisco.
Posts: 1,104
Default

The 6PPC is manily a BR round. Never considered that for the round that I was after. I know the PPC bolt face is a little different and the VT case head is the same as the .223. That what I had on hand so I went with that for starters. And a 20 VT reamer run in short would get me what I was after. Even went as far as shortening a .204 chamber for the first round to see how it worked.

Without getting "too technical", I figured I could push the shoulder back around .200" and get a shorter case. My thoughts/reasoning were less powder = less recoil. And lighter or heavier bullets would help in my final goal of being able to see my hits "thru the scope".
Easy enough to go to a rim fire round but, with the availability of rim fire ammo being scarce and not looking to much better for the time being, I would use a reloadeable case. Being able to reload and adjust the powder charge was what I was after. Load up or down for accuracy and felt recoil. And recoil relates to movement of the rifle when fired so the less movement, the better chance of seeing my hits thru the scope.
There's lots of rounds that are close to the size of the "short" so I've ended up reinventing the wheel.
Brass was a chore at times to make. Lots of case distortation when making brass from some of the military 5.56. Some was harder than others and rims not being flat after being forced to shape caused problems. 10 out of 50 cases that FTF. Once fired, everything seemed to smooth out and reloading the brass was pretty easy.
The .221 Fireball brass was getting scarce at times so I started making it out of mil 5.56 to see how it turned out. And being able to push the shoulder back lead me to building the "short".

Now the 22 TCM brass showed up and by necking it down to 20 or 17, I can get a case that is even shorter than the "short". A little research before hand would have saved me a lot of work and frustration but I was on a roll and didn't see the easier way to get to what I was after. Sometimes we have to go the harder route before we see the easier way. (I'm still learning)

Now the 17 VHA is even better yet. I'll know more about that in the near future. Already thinking about pushing the shoulder back on that case.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 11-16-2014, 02:16 PM
Bill K Bill K is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: N.E. Kommie Kalifornia
Posts: 6,304
Default Desired weight of a 20 VT

Mike, just out of curiosity Why push the shoulder back on the 20VT and now your idea of doing it with the 17VHA ? I know you say less powder, less recoil, but they have very little anyway and shoot very well, use very little powder as is. Is it just your nature to play and something to do ?
I am not faulting you, just wondering why ? Other than tinkering around and wanting something different to play with. Good you have the tools and knowledge to do so. Anyway just curious. Bill K
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 11-16-2014, 08:06 PM
MFG_BOP MFG_BOP is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 20
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nor Cal Mikie View Post
The 6PPC is manily a BR round. Never considered that for the round that I was after. I know the PPC bolt face is a little different and the VT case head is the same as the .223. That what I had on hand so I went with that for starters. And a 20 VT reamer run in short would get me what I was after. Even went as far as shortening a .204 chamber for the first round to see how it worked.

Without getting "too technical", I figured I could push the shoulder back around .200" and get a shorter case. My thoughts/reasoning were less powder = less recoil. And lighter or heavier bullets would help in my final goal of being able to see my hits "thru the scope".
Easy enough to go to a rim fire round but, with the availability of rim fire ammo being scarce and not looking to much better for the time being, I would use a reloadeable case. Being able to reload and adjust the powder charge was what I was after. Load up or down for accuracy and felt recoil. And recoil relates to movement of the rifle when fired so the less movement, the better chance of seeing my hits thru the scope.
There's lots of rounds that are close to the size of the "short" so I've ended up reinventing the wheel.
Brass was a chore at times to make. Lots of case distortation when making brass from some of the military 5.56. Some was harder than others and rims not being flat after being forced to shape caused problems. 10 out of 50 cases that FTF. Once fired, everything seemed to smooth out and reloading the brass was pretty easy.
The .221 Fireball brass was getting scarce at times so I started making it out of mil 5.56 to see how it turned out. And being able to push the shoulder back lead me to building the "short".

Now the 22 TCM brass showed up and by necking it down to 20 or 17, I can get a case that is even shorter than the "short". A little research before hand would have saved me a lot of work and frustration but I was on a roll and didn't see the easier way to get to what I was after. Sometimes we have to go the harder route before we see the easier way. (I'm still learning)

Now the 17 VHA is even better yet. I'll know more about that in the near future. Already thinking about pushing the shoulder back on that case.
Nor Cal, I put the dimensions of a 6PPC in the computer and scaled that down to the 223 case head. What I came up with was a 20VT shortened about .143". Thats why I asked you bcs I thought you would be after accuracy based on a 6PPC design. Probably its not that simple by juts scaling it down, but who knows... What did you use as a go no-go gauge? cool project you have there!!! I would be interested in hearing from you how accurate your cartridge is. Cheers
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 11-16-2014, 08:45 PM
bowfisher bowfisher is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Iowa
Posts: 820
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SS427 View Post

I see hits with my .17HMR...clearly less recoil energy of course. That is what I'm after, but perhaps it isn't possible in a .20VT rifle that weighs only 11 or 12 lbs. I don't want to go over 13 total lbs. 100 lbs would work if I had someone to pack it for me.

Not interested in a muzzle break and don't really care to video it.

With those limits, you're not going to find what you are looking for. 30# rifle and a brake and you will see the show at 20X.
__________________
"I used to wear barrels out fretting over a bunch of things that don't amount to a rats petutie."
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 11-16-2014, 10:53 PM
pdog pdog is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: SD
Posts: 68
Default

SS427 - I went with the McMillan McHale stock. This will be my 250 to 500 yard rifle with 39 gr Sierras. I use a 17 AH and 17 HH for the first 250 to 300 yards. Heavy wind I just shorten the yardage and the longer range rifle comes out sooner.

I said "see the results of the hits" which is a fraction of a second after impact. It is enough information to know what if any turret adjustments are needed for the next shot. My goal is not seeing the gore. My goal is to not waste any of the bullets that I have spent hours making as perfect as possible.
pdog
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 11-17-2014, 12:33 AM
Nor Cal Mikie Nor Cal Mikie is offline
Supporting Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: 125 miles North of San Francisco.
Posts: 1,104
Default

Guys:
First off, I'm working with rigs based on Savage actions. I don't bother to use gauges to set the headspace anymore.
I use a full length resized case and spin the barrel up snug. Check the bolt operation and if it feels good, snug the nut down. Double check the bolt feel and if it feels good to me, lock it down.
I use resized brass as a gauge on all my Savage rigs. None of my rigs wiill ever chamber a factory round because the headspace is on the snug side.
Most of my stuff is wildacts so there's no factory ammo available anyway.
All my brass gets the shoulders pushed back between .001 and .002 and the necks sized with bushings.

And as far as shortening a case, I just thought it would be a good idea to try it that way and see how much of a reduction in recoil I could come up with.
Still looking to see my hits thru the scope.
With the 20 VT "short", I'm able to get a five shot group that can be covered with a dime, from the bench at 100 yards. Havn't bothered to run any of the rounds across a Chrony. Not so much interested in speed as much as reduced recoil. So far, it's working out pretty good for what I was after. Still could be a little better in the recoil department and I'm working on that.
The "short" holds about 15 grains of powder to the shoulder neck junction.

The 17 VHA is working with about 6 to 10 grains so that would be a big step in lowering the felt recoil. (and that would be a big step in the right direction)
But what if you could make the case even shorter? Be working with 5 or 6 grains of powder. Got nothing to loose by trying? The question isn't why, it's why not?
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 11-17-2014, 04:00 AM
Sidewinder Sidewinder is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 56
Default

I have a Savage, right bolt, left port rifle with a heavy barrel. It probably weighs about 11 -12 pounds. I usually shoot my 20 VarTarg at 175 yards or more. A 17 HMR and 22LR are for shorter shots. I guess I am full of BS as I can see the bullets hit the dirt in the scope on misses and take the heads off the prairie dogs. We found that if you shoot the prairie dogs at 200-400 yards is best as they stay up and not go down the holes. You will love your 20 VT, right next to my 204 as favorite caliber. It depends on which one I am shooting at the time as to which one is the favorite!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:15 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.