The propellant is called "Long Range Match" when ordering surplus. It's military version of Reloader 15. I only had one to work with or I would have taken some averages. Hope this helps somebody.
- Thread starter justdave
- Start date
The propellant is called "Long Range Match" when ordering surplus. It's military version of Reloader 15. I only had one to work with or I would have taken some averages. Hope this helps somebody.
Hey man, did you make that ogive gauge yourself?
I have infrequent access to a machine shop and would love to make one if its as simple as a drill press and a reamer.
I have infrequent access to a machine shop and would love to make one if its as simple as a drill press and a reamer.
It looks an awful lot like a comparator from Sinclair International-
www.sinclairintl.com/reloading-equi...r-hex-style-bullet-comparators-prod34262.aspx
I have pulled and weighted a couple lots of LR.They were 43.5 and 43.8 of powder that looked a lot like RL15.I think they load to velocity not grains of powder.
M118LR pulled and measured
WDavidSims,
What is the deduction of measurement for the ogive comparator? Meaning, how far across is it, and how much (if any) do you add back on for the depth of the bullet going into the comparator. ya gotta love tools though...
WDavidSims,
What is the deduction of measurement for the ogive comparator? Meaning, how far across is it, and how much (if any) do you add back on for the depth of the bullet going into the comparator. ya gotta love tools though...
Deduct 1" for the ogive measurement.
thanks for taking time to post
great info is even better with pics
alliant webpage for R15 says used exclusively in military LR ammo
or something to that effect......
great info is even better with pics
alliant webpage for R15 says used exclusively in military LR ammo
or something to that effect......
Last edited:
reverse engineering M118 LR.I got some of the Long Range Match powder and 175gr pulls to load.
thanks for the thread.
thanks for the thread.
The powder in the pan in the pic IS NOT RL15 or a non-cannister equivalent. Thrown and looked at thousands of charges of that stuff - does not look like what is in that pan.
interesting....I thought M118LR was using 42 grains IMR4895.
Yea - Alliant's advertising is deceptive. RL15 is not the EXCLUSIVE powder for M118LR.
I have both RL15 and H4895 that has come out of the LC arsenal and made its way to the surplus market that is now sitting on my shelf.
Regarding "Long Range Match", the only reference I could fund to it was a 2009 LRH forum reference. Looks like at some point somebody bought some LC plant surplus, repackaged it, and sold it with that name on it.
Pat's Reloading is a good source of info for what is really going on in this regard, but I doubt in today's world you'll be able to get them on the phone. Spent some time with them FTF over the years so got the inside info on what really goes on.
I have both RL15 and H4895 that has come out of the LC arsenal and made its way to the surplus market that is now sitting on my shelf.
Regarding "Long Range Match", the only reference I could fund to it was a 2009 LRH forum reference. Looks like at some point somebody bought some LC plant surplus, repackaged it, and sold it with that name on it.
Pat's Reloading is a good source of info for what is really going on in this regard, but I doubt in today's world you'll be able to get them on the phone. Spent some time with them FTF over the years so got the inside info on what really goes on.
Was this straight from lake city?
Last edited:
You should measure the water weight volume of the case as well as the neck thickness. This will give an indication of brass thickness and the internal volume.
Very good data when comparing brass.
Volumes of various fired and resized 308 brass
1972 Olin Winchester 56.1gr
2012 Winchester 54.6gr
Lapua 55.0gr
LC 07 53.3gr
LC 09 54gr
Hornady Match 55gr
Rem 53.3gr
Very good data when comparing brass.
Volumes of various fired and resized 308 brass
1972 Olin Winchester 56.1gr
2012 Winchester 54.6gr
Lapua 55.0gr
LC 07 53.3gr
LC 09 54gr
Hornady Match 55gr
Rem 53.3gr
Look through the "Reloading depot" forum. There should be several RE-15 175 loads. A 178 Amax would net the same results.
Thanks waste_not, exactly what I needed.
No I think the road curves a bit between St Louis and Ohio.
On that hex bullet comparator does the 30 cal hole just give you the length of bullet where the shoulder actually meets the rifling? I'm assuming that helps gauge a perfect oal for seating? Sorry if that's a dumb question, i just started reloading... Definitely didn't snag a comparator yet, and i'm wondering if I need one.
kinda looks like ar-comp powder
It gives you length to ogive. Which is where the bullet first touches the rifling. Its definetly a more consistant means of measure since bullet tips and meplats are generally not very true. Just measure the loaded round with the bullet through the correct caliber hole on the comparator and subtract 1.0" for your true length to ogive measurement.
Ok, so was there a final decision on the make-up of the powder? Thanks.
I've pulled various years of M118LR apart, powder charge is different as is the velocity. I don't think I have anything newer then '10 I pulled apart to check powder charge.
If want to clone the M118LR you have been using, get some chrono data and find load with similar burn rate powder that gives same velocity/accuracy. 4895, RL15, Varget, N-140, 4064 or similar will get you desired results. If you are running in an M1A, even an AR-10/DPMS LR but less critical, you'll want to stick to the faster side of the burn rate to keep port pressure in desired range.
YMMV
If want to clone the M118LR you have been using, get some chrono data and find load with similar burn rate powder that gives same velocity/accuracy. 4895, RL15, Varget, N-140, 4064 or similar will get you desired results. If you are running in an M1A, even an AR-10/DPMS LR but less critical, you'll want to stick to the faster side of the burn rate to keep port pressure in desired range.
YMMV
The title of "Long Range Match" powder is something that was applied by the dealer selling the surplus powder. If this was produced in 2007 (as the brass is headstamped) then it's nothing more than plain old Reloder 15 powder, albeit from a bulk lot shipped directly to Lake City. Reloder 15 became the powder of choice for M118LR when ATK (who owns alliant) won the contract to run Lake City some years back. Prior to that, when Olin had the contract to operate the plant, the powder used was a non-cannister powder known as WC-750. Not coincidentally, Olin produced this powder, and it was the standard powder for M118LR, as well as the previous runs of M118 Special Ball. Before this, Remington had the contract for many years, and during their tenure IMR4895 (DuPont powder, also under the Olin umbrella) was the powder of choice . . . do we see a pattern here? The government doesn't specify powder, it specifies performance characteristics. Velocity, pressure, SD, accuracy, temp stability, etc., and so long as the resulting ammo meets those specs, the gov is happy. As a result, the powder in the ammo depends solely on who had the contract during the period the ammo was produced.
The only two features that the handloader can't duplicate for this ammo are the primer (it's an M43, which is not commercially available; not to be confused with the M34 which CCI produces), and the asphaltum sealant inside the case neck (you can see it on the bullet in the photo). Aside from this, it's not hard to effectively duplicate the performance of this ammo.
And as someone has already mentioned, there is no specification for powder charge weight. This gets worked up with every new batch of powder, to assure that it delivers the same performance required by the specs. The powder charge is tested down to the hundredth of a grain to establish the midline base for that lot, and the charge weight variation for production standards is set on either side of that line. Whatever that comes out to, that's what the charge weight will be for that particular batch of powder. If I recall correctly, I believe the velocity requirement was 2580 fps @ 78 ft, which equates back to something like 2620 fps at the muzzle. Over the years, I certified literally scores of millions of these bullets, firing tens of thousands of groups for thousands of certifications. Done up right, this combination still shoots pretty damned well.
The only two features that the handloader can't duplicate for this ammo are the primer (it's an M43, which is not commercially available; not to be confused with the M34 which CCI produces), and the asphaltum sealant inside the case neck (you can see it on the bullet in the photo). Aside from this, it's not hard to effectively duplicate the performance of this ammo.
And as someone has already mentioned, there is no specification for powder charge weight. This gets worked up with every new batch of powder, to assure that it delivers the same performance required by the specs. The powder charge is tested down to the hundredth of a grain to establish the midline base for that lot, and the charge weight variation for production standards is set on either side of that line. Whatever that comes out to, that's what the charge weight will be for that particular batch of powder. If I recall correctly, I believe the velocity requirement was 2580 fps @ 78 ft, which equates back to something like 2620 fps at the muzzle. Over the years, I certified literally scores of millions of these bullets, firing tens of thousands of groups for thousands of certifications. Done up right, this combination still shoots pretty damned well.
As most of this information can be found elsewhere on the hide, I believe the import thing to take away from this thread is that powder varies from lot to lot.
Example: with my old lot of Varget, 42.8gr under 175SMK or 178AMAX in LC MATCH brass with CCI200 primer yielded 2640fps out of my 24" Steyr barrel - and nicely duplicated my reference lots of M118LR and FGMM 175 7.62NATO (not .308). But with the new lot of Varget, it's 43.2gr to achieve the same velocity and accuracy.
The old lot took 44gr in Winchester brass to achieve the same results. I predict 44.3-44.4gr with the new lot in Win brass.
If you are looking to duplicate a known load, like FGMM or M118LR, then the most important tool you can have is a chronograph. Chrono the reference load, then work your way up to that velocity with your own loads.
This is different from tailoring a load to your rifle. But I often can place 5 shots all touching at 200 yards with the above loads in a variety of nice bolt guns. And my SCAR-17 likes them too - around .5MOA.
Example: with my old lot of Varget, 42.8gr under 175SMK or 178AMAX in LC MATCH brass with CCI200 primer yielded 2640fps out of my 24" Steyr barrel - and nicely duplicated my reference lots of M118LR and FGMM 175 7.62NATO (not .308). But with the new lot of Varget, it's 43.2gr to achieve the same velocity and accuracy.
The old lot took 44gr in Winchester brass to achieve the same results. I predict 44.3-44.4gr with the new lot in Win brass.
If you are looking to duplicate a known load, like FGMM or M118LR, then the most important tool you can have is a chronograph. Chrono the reference load, then work your way up to that velocity with your own loads.
This is different from tailoring a load to your rifle. But I often can place 5 shots all touching at 200 yards with the above loads in a variety of nice bolt guns. And my SCAR-17 likes them too - around .5MOA.
Duplicating m118lr
http://www.snipershide.com/shooting/showthread.php?t=133616&highlight=+duplicate++m118lr
http://www.snipershide.com/shooting/showthread.php?t=17152&highlight=+duplicate++m118lr
The first one should prove to be very useful.
http://www.snipershide.com/shooting/showthread.php?t=133616&highlight=+duplicate++m118lr
http://www.snipershide.com/shooting/showthread.php?t=17152&highlight=+duplicate++m118lr
The first one should prove to be very useful.
Last edited:
Great information on the m118LR
I am surprised the C.O.L. is so long at 2.819. I doubt this would fit in my GAP rifle at all. My 2.800 lengths barely fit!
Interesting to note, I have a Hornady comparitor, and my '12 M118 measures 2.243 to ogive. 2.819 oal though, so I am assuming this is a difference in comparators, just a fyi for anyone using different tools.
The 308 load I use has a OAL of 2.825" and has plenty of room in an A&I magazine, surely GAP uses the top notch A&I mags, or not?
They do. I have an AW magazine and there is plenty of room there. What I was referring to was the chamber size. When I cycle a loaded round, there was rifle marks at the ogive of the 168 grain bullets in the Federal GMM rounds and they measured 2.800. My reloads were 2.808 and they required a bit of force to close the bolt. I suspect GAP rifles have minimum specifications to maximize their accuracy.
This is awesome! Thank you.
Kevin,
About 8 years back, we obtained then pulled down dozens of different vintage M118LR cartridges attempting to collect the information in your post. One thing that is worth mentioning is that the WC-750 powder used in the earlier M118LR cartridges was a spherical BALL powder. That surprised us. Thanks for your info!
Guess I didn't mention that, but yeah, WC-750 is a double-based spherical. Pretty decent stuff, too. I just always found it amusing that "the best" powder for the M118LR (and most other munitions produced at the plant) were ALWAYS (coincidentally, I'm sure) ones that were made by the parent company of whoever currently held the LC operators contract.
Bottom line to take away here is, spherical ball powder, single base extruded or double base extruded . . . it all works in the 308, and works rather well. Kinda nice working with a cartridge in which it's almost harder to work up a "bad" load than a good one.
Bottom line to take away here is, spherical ball powder, single base extruded or double base extruded . . . it all works in the 308, and works rather well. Kinda nice working with a cartridge in which it's almost harder to work up a "bad" load than a good one.
Has anyone pulled apart some of the newer Mk316 ammunition? I know the internet says 41.7grains of 4064 but I tried that charge and didn't get the kind of velocities that'd be 'reliably supersonic past 1000' even in a 26" barrel and the accuracy stunk.
BCP,
I want to say 2620, or somewhere right around that is what LC wants to ensure that the ammo is reliably supersonic out to 1000 in most conditions. If I recall, the velocity for the M118LR was specified at 2580 fps, but that's at 78 feet from the muzzle, typical military ordnance measurement.
I want to say 2620, or somewhere right around that is what LC wants to ensure that the ammo is reliably supersonic out to 1000 in most conditions. If I recall, the velocity for the M118LR was specified at 2580 fps, but that's at 78 feet from the muzzle, typical military ordnance measurement.
M118LR pulled and measured
Measure your chamber. If you are seating that close to the lands with FGMM it could be that you need the throat moved forward a bit.
more good info,
thanks guys
thanks guys
That is interesting. I find it hard to believe that the folks at G.A. Precision would make a mistake like that. How do I measure the chamber then?
Meanwhile, the accuracy of the rifle has now (120 rounds) achieved 3/8 inch MOA at 100 yards, so I cannot complain about the chamber versus the accuracy.
Thank you for the info.
Build enough guns and it happens. I've seen two of them so far. Incorrect measurements at setup, probably. No big deal. Easily fixed. It should shoot very well either way, but I even saw one that would stick bullets into the lands at factory OAL.
It wasn't a mistake at all..My GAP SCLE by Eric Reed and probably other GAP rifles built during that time frame were chambered using a 95 Palma reamer. The 95 Palma chamber measurement has a short lead/throat and is designed for a 168 SMK or 155 Palma bullets. The M118LR rounds are loaded with somewhat longer ogive measurement then most 308 Match ammo. These are designed for the 7.62 NATO chamber specs of military rifles. During one of my first testing sessions, I loaded a M118LR round into the chamber then cycled the bolt to remove the loaded round and powder spilled into the action. Apparently the bullet had jammed into the lands and was stuck.
I learned this the hard way - but it's always a good practice to know your chamber (Ogive) measurement for the bullet you're loading. I had re-seat all my M118LR rounds deeper to accommodate the 95 Palma Chamber of my GAP. I also plan on sending it to GAP to have the throat moved forward.
Here is a short vid of the process and tools used to measure. Hornady Lock-N-Load Overall Length Gage - Bing Videos
I learned this the hard way - but it's always a good practice to know your chamber (Ogive) measurement for the bullet you're loading. I had re-seat all my M118LR rounds deeper to accommodate the 95 Palma Chamber of my GAP. I also plan on sending it to GAP to have the throat moved forward.
Here is a short vid of the process and tools used to measure. Hornady Lock-N-Load Overall Length Gage - Bing Videos
This, precisely; is what I took away from R.L. McPherson's Cartridges of the World some many years back.
It's this velocity based load development process that I believe is used for all US Arsenal loaded ammunition. That's an important distinction, as these cartridges are not (cannot be) dedicated to a specific barrel or even to a specific firearm system.
Various literature has led me to believe that while WC-750 is a proprietary Canister propellant, it is apparently most closely approximated by W-748. Using the velocity based arsenal process for determining a charge weight may get you an equivalent load, but burn rates are significant, and a given velocity does not equate to a given bore transit time, and it is that time which dictates compatibility with barrel harmonics.
In essence, I have concluded that attempting to clone arsenal (or commercial) ammo is not a slam-dunk method for duplicating ammunition performance, and that the only true way to make a barrel perform to its potential is to apply individual load development to each barrel.
Greg
