Budget rifle load development/ bragging board

coyoteking

coyoteking

CGN frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
32   0   0
Location
SW Sask
I just started load development for a Ruger Predator in 22-250 and I’m pretty impressed with how accurate this inexpensive rifle is so far. Had to come here to brag a bit.


Where would you go from here? I’m leaning towards trying the 32.1gr charge for my seating depth tests. Or maybe I shouldn’t even bother with changing the seating depth?

Rifle has a 10” twist, 22” barrel.
The load is new Lapua brass, 69 SMK bullet, Fed GM 210M primer, and Varget powder.

IMG_6190.jpg
 

Attachments

  • IMG_6190.jpg
    IMG_6190.jpg
    48.7 KB · Views: 420
coyoteking said:
I just started load development for a Ruger Predator in 22-250 and I’m pretty impressed with how accurate this inexpensive rifle is so far. Had to come here to brag a bit.


Where would you go from here? I’m leaning towards trying the 32.1gr charge for my seating depth tests. Or maybe I shouldn’t even bother with changing the seating depth?

Rifle has a 10” twist, 22” barrel.
The load is new Lapua brass, 69 SMK bullet, Fed GM 210M primer, and Varget powder.

View attachment 719520
Click to expand...

What range are you doing your tests at, I need to develop a load for 22-250 using 55gr bullets and I need to test 3 kinds of powder and 3 styles of bullets, I’ll be using the same primers for everything
 
32.1 looks like a sweet spot alright but a single 3-shot is just an indicator
31.7 has less verticality so I'd be trying a few more loads in the area , at longer distance too to realize what happens when exaggerated
oal is the last step to play with imho
 
That 69 grain boat-tail bullet in all honesty is too heavy - long - for a 1 in 10 twist. If your rifle is indeed a 1 in 10 twist I would try some groups at 200 and 300 yards to see what happens.
 
'Boo said:
That 69 grain boat-tail bullet in all honesty is too heavy - long - for a 1 in 10 twist. If your rifle is indeed a 1 in 10 twist I would try some groups at 200 and 300 yards to see what happens.
Click to expand...

I don't think 1:10 is too slow for a 69 bullet. In fact, a 80 gr Matchking would work. The 22-250 is fast (higher RPM)

As for longer range, a bullet gains stability as it moves down range. If it isn't side-ways at 100, it will stay good.

If you try heavier bullets (less wind drift) I suggest a step slower powder - like 4350
 
Last edited:
I've had a couple of Ruger Predator rifles, chambered for the 223rem, 6.5CM and 7-08.

They all shot well, even with factory ammo.

They're a great mid-priced rifle but not suitable for a lot of people.

I liked the rifles I had, with detachable mags and laminated stocks.

Others liked them as well and I couldn't seem to hold onto one for more than a couple of months before someone offered more than I paid for them.

I don't think your groups are all that unusual for this platform and you've just discovered how good it really is.

I don't particularly like the Ruger system of pinning the firing pin to the cocking piece, so haven't managed to retain one of their bolt rifles, other than an M77R, 22 Hornet. Never given me any issues once I figured out a load it likes.

Good shooting. From the looks of those groups, that rifle is one of those gems that will shoot better than most shooters can hold.

IMHO, your groups are indicative of the slight changes in shooting position and general control of the trigger operator, more than anything else.
 
Ganderite said:
I don't think 1:10 is too slow for a 69 bullet. In fact, a 80 gr Matchking would work. The 22-250 is fast (higher RPM)

As for longer range, a bullet gains stability as it moves down range. If it isn't side-ways at 100, it will stay good.

If you try heavier bullets (less wind drift) I suggest a step slower powder - like 4350
Click to expand...

In my 223rem chambered Predator, 69 grain worked well but when I went up to 77 grn SMK the groups opened up at all ranges, out to 300 to around 3moa.

I couldn't find a recipe that fit into the magazine that would shoot better.
 
bearhunter said:
I've had a couple of Ruger Predator rifles, chambered for the 223rem, 6.5CM and 7-08.

They all shot well, even with factory ammo.

They're a great mid-priced rifle but not suitable for a lot of people.

I liked the rifles I had, with detachable mags and laminated stocks.

Others liked them as well and I couldn't seem to hold onto one for more than a couple of months before someone offered more than I paid for them.

I don't think your groups are all that unusual for this platform and you've just discovered how good it really is.

I don't particularly like the Ruger system of pinning the firing pin to the cocking piece, so haven't managed to retain one of their bolt rifles, other than an M77R, 22 Hornet. Never given me any issues once I figured out a load it likes.

Good shooting. From the looks of those groups, that rifle is one of those gems that will shoot better than most shooters can hold.

IMHO, your groups are indicative of the slight changes in shooting position and general control of the trigger operator, more than anything else.
Click to expand...

I’m really liking this rifle so far. It’s nice and handy for coyote hunting, and I’ll probably shoot a few gophers with it next year.

I had a M77 VT in 22-250, heavy barrel and laminate stock, but could never get it to shoot to my liking.
 
fightinghamster said:
What range are you doing your tests at, I need to develop a load for 22-250 using 55gr bullets and I need to test 3 kinds of powder and 3 styles of bullets, I’ll be using the same primers for everything
Click to expand...

I shot these at 100 yards. After finding a charge weight I like, I play with the seating depth to see if I can tighten the groups up a little more, then I move out to 300 yards and shoot 3, 5 shot groups for a final test.
 
I'm not a target guy. Hunter, reload because I shoot some volume, and cost. Maybe I've been lucky, but variance with the number of rifles it's unlikely, never really had much trouble getting rifles to shot...never.

Most of the "value" rifles have flirted around the edges. Spinning synthetic stocks as "better", "more accurate ", when in truth it's elimination of craftsmanship for the sake of manufacturing. The Tikka T3 is a perfect example. Manufacturing shortcuts, in themselves, are not a problem. It's when those cuts affect safety and accuracy that it's a problem. Not the case here.
 
coyoteking said:
I’m really liking this rifle so far. It’s nice and handy for coyote hunting, and I’ll probably shoot a few gophers with it next year.

I had a M77 VT in 22-250, heavy barrel and laminate stock, but could never get it to shoot to my liking.
Click to expand...


Ruger went through a transition after Bill died and the barrels they were using weren't as good as they should have been. The company really ended up with financial issues because of it. They were relying on their handgun and shotgun products. When they went to CNC machining and a different barrel maker, things got much better or went back to normal. I don't remember if they started making their own barrels or not?????

Whatever, their recent offerings have been very good but pricier of course.
 
Truthfully, looking at those groups, it comes down to one shot to try and see differences between them. One ever so slightly pulled shot, can be the difference. With my varmint/target rifles, I use 5 shot groups, and with a cartridge like the 22-250, I use .5gr increments. And if .2gr makes a significant difference in accuracy, then that load may not be stable in varying temperatures.
 
bearhunter said:
Ruger went through a transition after Bill died and the barrels they were using weren't as good as they should have been. The company really ended up with financial issues because of it. They were relying on their handgun and shotgun products. When they went to CNC machining and a different barrel maker, things got much better or went back to normal. I don't remember if they started making their own barrels or not?????

Whatever, their recent offerings have been very good but pricier of course.
Click to expand...

I recall Bill bragging (1992) that they were paying $12 for barrels. Quality was not good.
 
Last edited:
coyoteking said:
I shot these at 100 yards. After finding a charge weight I like, I play with the seating depth to see if I can tighten the groups up a little more, then I move out to 300 yards and shoot 3, 5 shot groups for a final test.
Click to expand...

What is the important accuracy distance for the rifle? 100 yards? or 300 to 500 yards?

100 yard groups are valid for 100 but often mean nothing about longer range accuracy.

The longer range accurate load may not look very good at 100. This is because barrel harmonics determine longer range grouping and it can only been seen by shooting at the full distance.

If 300 yard accuracy is important, skip 100 yard load development. It does not help.
 
Ganderite said:
What is the important accuracy distance for the rifle? 100 yards? or 300 to 500 yards?

100 yard groups are valid for 100 but often mean nothing about longer range accuracy.

The longer range accurate load may not look very good at 100. This is because barrel harmonics determine longer range grouping and it can only been seen by shooting at the full distance.

If 300 yard accuracy is important, skip 100 yard load development. It does not help.
Click to expand...

Maybe I’ve just been lucky, but I’ve never had a rifle shoot any different at longer ranges than it did at 100. If it shoots 1/2 moa at 100, and your extreme spread is low, it should still shoot 1/2 MOA out to 1000 yards, so long as your bullet stays supersonic out that far. I’ve never had a rifle that opened up or conversely, shot tighter at longer range. That said, my total experience developing loads is with less than 30 rifles.

This particular rifle is going to be used mainly for coyote calling, so most shots will be under 200 yards with the occasional shot out as far as 600.
 
Ganderite said:
I recall Bill bragging (1992) that they were paying $12 for barrels. Quality was not good.
Click to expand...

You're right.

I forgot that Bill started the demise of the Ruger "best for the buck" reputation with that comment and those barrels.

I heard a comment on those lines at the last Salmon Arm Gun Show.

The old timer stated he would "never buy another RUGER rifle because they all have cheap barrels that don't shoot worth a tinkers darn."
 
Fassteel said:
if you start with varget you may only need to test with on kind of powder....
Click to expand...

Varget is one of the powder I’m testing, hopefully it can be used in my other rifle calibers too, also testing win760 and h4064, using the same bullet and powder weight to do a load for 223 and I’m hoping to find a powder from those that works good in my 303 Brit and 30-06
 
fightinghamster said:
Varget is one of the powder I’m testing, hopefully it can be used in my other rifle calibers too, also testing win760 and h4064, using the same bullet and powder weight to do a load for 223 and I’m hoping to find a powder from those that works good in my 303 Brit and 30-06
Click to expand...

I had very good results with Varget and 165/168 grain bullets in my 30-06.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom