Can someone print me out a quickload for 308 win, 185 Berger Juggernaut, IMR4064, Case capacity 54.6 gr, COAL 2.934 Thanks.
Need Qiuckload for 308 185 Berger Juggs IMR4064
- Thread starter whatsupdoc
- Start date
A new unfired or FL sized Lapua .308 case. Interestingly to me, I had just recently measured the volume of some of my new Lapua .308 once fired cases trimmed to 2.005" that I had just resized and I got exactly the same volume as he posted of 54.6 gr of H20. Now, I don't know which case manufacture he's using, but I thought it was an interesting coincidence.
Last edited:
Here's a few IMR 4064 loads (185 Jugg and 175 SMK)
Savage Model 10 Ashbury Precision Ordinance .308, 24 " barrel, 1-10" twist, SilencerCo ASR flash hider.
Berger 185 gr Juggs
Prvi brass x 2 fired
IMR 4064 43.0
Fed 210M
COL 2.015
COAL 2.805
Magneto v3
2650, 2645, 2646, 2651 SD 2.8
1” Slight pressure ring (10 shot group)
Sierra MK 175 HPBT
Prvi brass x 3 fired
IMR 4064 43.0
Fed 210M
COL 2.005
COAL 2.735
Magneto v5
2704, 2700, 2705 SD 2.6
1.25” mod pressure circle (10 shot group)
Sierra MK 175 HPBT
Prvi brass x 3 fired
IMR 4064 43.5
Fed 210M
COL 2.005
COAL 2.735
Magneto v3
2707, 2731, 2719 SD 12
1.25” mod pressure circle (10 shot group)
Savage Model 10 Ashbury Precision Ordinance .308, 24 " barrel, 1-10" twist, SilencerCo ASR flash hider.
Berger 185 gr Juggs
Prvi brass x 2 fired
IMR 4064 43.0
Fed 210M
COL 2.015
COAL 2.805
Magneto v3
2650, 2645, 2646, 2651 SD 2.8
1” Slight pressure ring (10 shot group)
Sierra MK 175 HPBT
Prvi brass x 3 fired
IMR 4064 43.0
Fed 210M
COL 2.005
COAL 2.735
Magneto v5
2704, 2700, 2705 SD 2.6
1.25” mod pressure circle (10 shot group)
Sierra MK 175 HPBT
Prvi brass x 3 fired
IMR 4064 43.5
Fed 210M
COL 2.005
COAL 2.735
Magneto v3
2707, 2731, 2719 SD 12
1.25” mod pressure circle (10 shot group)
You're data is pretty much matching mine for the 175 SMK's out of a 24" barrel. For the 175 SMK's, my sweet spot is at 42.5 gr of 4064 where I get an MV average of 2676 fps. And when I look and my QuickLoad app information, it's essentially spot on for the load you're using. Only you're definitely at the high pressure point and over SAAMI's 62,000 psi maximum when loading 43.5 gr. I've loaded as high as 43.7 and got pressure signs like you as well.
Recently, I bought a bunch of Berger 185 jugs and am just getting ready to do some load development with the 4065. So, you're data here has given me some confidence that QuickLoad will be accurate enough to cut down on my development time. So, thanks for posting that.
Here's some of that QuickLoad info you might find of interest:
Thanks for the QuickLoad! I don't have that program but looks great for data.
Here's my other load data, fyi.
Here's my other load data, fyi.
I've added some of my data to your PDF file (see attached).
I've loaded some Pro 2000-Mr and tried it since I had some on my shelf. Someone had open some cases of Federal's Berger 185 Jugs and found that the powder looked and smelled exactly like the 2000-MR and said he got similar results. So, I did the same thing in pulling some of the bullets then weighed the powder to see just how much Federal was loading them (45.1 grs). I loaded some of my own Federal brass the same plus some cartridges with a little more to see how they performed. Well, I didn't get good results as I did with Federal's cartridges. Since Pro 2000-Mr is rather temperature sensitive, I'm not particularly interested in it any longer given that my local shooting is often at extreme temperatures.
Last edited:
Question for you with Quickload- today I was doing some testing with a 260ai- and with very little published data I was thinking about buying Quickloads. But as I searched these threads I keep seeing the warnings to still use the manual and start at 10% below max and pretty much build the load the same old way. For those who are using it-what are the big advantages? And would you purchase it again?
Absolutely, I would purchase it again.
First, one has to understand that Quickload's calculations are NOT absolute as there can be many other variable factors involved. One, for example, we know that the burn rate of any particular powder can vary from one lot to another. And so the burn rate that's in QL can often show results that don't quite match up with what one is getting in the real world. If one takes a little time to understand the variables of some of the inputs, one can make adjustments to fit what one is seeing land getting in the real world, which can then produce QL calculations that are pretty close.
Once some adjustments are made in QL to fit my real world data, QL is very useful in finding where to start with replacement powder to use for a powder that may not be presently attainable. Same kind of thing if one wants to use a bullet of the same weight, but of a different design, or . . . and/or even a bullet of a different weight. There's an Optimal Barrel Time (OBT) calculation to match with a OBT app that helps find a powder load that's at or close to an accuracy node (see pic below). And again, it's not necessarily precise, but I find it gets me in the ball park to save some time, effort and money, in load development. Though I still have to do load development, QL helps me do it in shorter time, fewer trips to the range and with less expense. That savings I've gotten in development expense more than pays for the cost of QL.
If one is not into the amount of detail involved with QL, then is most likely better to to go about load development the old fashioned way, like starting at 10% below max and just use ladder and/or OCW testing to get where you want to go. The "old fashioned way" still works just fine.
Last edited:
