New 6mm Advanced Rifle Cartridge

[flogxal]

Yesterday I tested my 6.5 CM load (N150, Berger 140 Hybrid) and did 25 with Berger 140 and 5 with Hornady Aeromatch 140. Just steel at 600yds, but results were similar downrange. And maybe a fluke, but the 5 shot SD/ES on the Aeromatch was a good bit smaller. I shot them as 20 Berger, 5 Aeromatch, 5 Berger. So there were two 5 shot strings to compare sample size wise.

No charge adjustment or seating depth change, same COAL, just swapped bullets. I'll load the rest of the 100 in Aeromatch and test them this winter. And will do likewise for 6 ARC and Aeromatch.

Proof 18" SS 6 ARC shot Precision Hunter 103gr and Black 105gr well, slight nod to the 103gr.

 

[Snuby642]

Looks like I will try cfe223, it's fast but sometimes not as accurate as others.

Anyone used it with the 105 Aeromatch 6mm?

I have big jugs of
H335 #91 burn chart
Ramshot Tac #97 burn
Cfe 223 #118
And smaller supply of Varget #113
And a little Imr 8208 xbr #95

So I figure 105g is heavy for caliber, that probably cuts H335 out.

Hodgdon lever revolution #121 on the chart and cfe223 #118 are the two listed most for the 105 Aeromatch.

I used cfe to get basic one moa loads in 223, 308, and 6.5g , but it was never the best for any of the bullets but I may try other bullets of different weights as I get a small idea of burn rates.

This is in a 24 inch gasser so it will react differently than the shorter barrels but I don't know what direction.

Be nice if I find a good place for the cfe223, but I didn't get this 6mm ARC to be satisfied with one moa.

Edit: the other problem with the cfe 223 is I can probably get way more in the case than I should . I do have the type 2 Bolt.

 

[Snuby642]

WARNING FULL STOP

If you are using this data from Hornady.

It lists 28.6g of cfe 223 powder for their 105g 6mm Aeromatch bullet.
Bullet # 24573, I checked my box.

At 27.7 cfe 223 feels right at being compressed. I have that T-shirt, just say no. They are showing 28.6 as a max and 2500 fps. I don't think you can get 0.9 more grains in that case.

Hornady says use your old data, let's see , Berger says 27.7 max on cfe223 at 96% case fill. Berger's 105 hybrid is 0.014 thousands shorter.

I have moved my coal out to 2.280 but the Aeromatch ate 14 thousands of that already.

Trying to get new 11th edition or their reloading app up and running, hard fail. I have a trouble report in for support.

Cfe223 gets nasty quick at the top end and the 6mm arc has a bolt that is not as strong to begin with.

 

[flogxal]

Hornady's loads for 105gr probably didn't use the new Aeromatch and maybe didn't use any Bergers for reference, maybe?

Earlier today I ordered my dies, some Aeromatch 105 and some Berger Hybrid Target 105. Just by analogy to 6.5 Grendel I am betting CFE 223, TAC, 8208 to be pretty good with them. I'll probably try VV powders first though.

 

[WeR0206]

WARNING FULL STOP

If you are using this data from Hornady.View attachment 8791840
It lists 28.6g of cfe 223 powder for their 105g 6mm Aeromatch bullet.
Bullet # 24573, I checked my box.

At 27.7 cfe 223 feels right at being compressed. I have that T-shirt, just say no. They are showing 28.6 as a max and 2500 fps. I don't think you can get 0.9 more grains in that case.

Hornady says use your old data, let's see , Berger says 27.7 max on cfe223 at 96% case fill. Berger's 105 hybrid is 0.014 thousands shorter.

I have moved my coal out to 2.280 but the Aeromatch ate 14 thousands of that already.

View attachment 8791845

Trying to get new 11th edition or their reloading app up and running, hard fail. I have a trouble report in for support.

Cfe223 gets nasty quick at the top end and the 6mm arc has a bolt that is not as strong to begin with.

I have the 11th edition of the Hornady reloading app and for CFE 223 it lists the same charge weight (28.6 gr) and COAL (2.245") for the 105gr Aeromatch as your numbers.

It's odd to me that for the 105gr BTHP the COAL @ 2.200" is .045" shorter than the 105gr Aeromatch.

 

[Snuby642]

Take a close look at the profile of the bullets.

The pictured 105 bthp is more of a tangent ogive and the Aeromatch is secant at the front then transitions to tangent. That's better than secant for a gas gun all the way .

The factory black series ammo had 105g bthp and it was a coal of 2.200 with a bto of 1.583

This is the crap that happens when you get a technical pubs writer instead of reloader to write your book.

 

[WeR0206]

The factory black series ammo had 105g bthp and it was a coal of 2.220 with a bto of 1.583

Hmm...So it sounds like their reloading manual has a typo re: the 105 BTHP, it should be a COAL of 2.220" not 2.200"? A 20 thou difference is a pretty big change.

I was really curious what the COAL was on their factory black 105 BTHP, thanks for filling me in on that.

 

[Snuby642]

Now it we can get clarification on cfe powder charge from Hornady .

I think it's obvious they did not put 28.6 under that new bullet.

On most published cfe223 loads in several calibers I have found an accuracy node at 90 -95 % of max and not needing to try and get to the next node.

Usually I got pressure problems before getting to the next one.

 

[flogxal]

I have the 11th edition of the Hornady reloading app and for CFE 223 it lists the same charge weight (28.6 gr) and COAL (2.245") for the 105gr Aeromatch as your numbers.

It's odd to me that for the 105gr BTHP the COAL @ 2.200" is .045" shorter than the 105gr Aeromatch.

That is weird, especially when it looks from the pictures (to me) like the Aeromatch has a longer nose vs the 105 BTHP used in Black.

 

[Snuby642]

I went and confirmed my measurements on the bullets.

Old 105 bthp match
Length 1.220 (from web)
Nose 0.636 (0.640 nom)

New 105 Aeromatch
Length 1.270
Nose 0.740

0.100 thousands longer nose
0.050 longer bullet

In my load 0.060 more bullet in the case, even though I went to COAL of 2.280 vs 2.220

Consider all measurements nominal as the tip varies.

0.060 less case capacity, 0.080 less if you use plastic magazines.

And we are using the same old load data? Why

Cfe 223 is the only one I have checked so far. They are probably all old data.

 

[Snuby642]

Do we not have a Hornady rep here on the hide?

 

[Snuby642]

Well Hornady is looking into my online problems and been advised on the load data (discrepancy).

So it's in work.

 

[Jdowns0415]

i used the hornady max charges of lever and CFE in my 18 inch arc and it was popping primers on new brass out of the brass. I have since stopped using it in the summer lol. Now I just use 27-27.5 of tac for just about everything over 100 gr. 80gr eldvt is still max charge.

 

[TripleBull]

Looks like I will try cfe223, it's fast but sometimes not as accurate as others.

I have two 6 ARC AR's. One has a 22" Shaw barrel. It shot well with CFE 223, but was more temperature sensitive than Lever. I had to run it about 0.2 grains below what I originally thought was optimum to get the best balance of precision and temperature tolerance with CFE. My other 6 ARC has an 18" Proof CF barrel. It was not as temp sensitive to CFE 223, but it was not as precise as the Shaw gun. Most of my load development was on the 110 ATip, the 109 Berger and the Hornady ELDM. My first tests with Varget were just OK, but later on in development, I found a better process to size Lapua 6.5 Grendel brass and Varget became my favorite powder for the Shaw gun. It would shoot 5 shot groups below 0.4 MOA on the best days and was nearly always below 0.6. Most of my shooting with these guns is in the 400 to 1000 yard range, so I have not gotten a ton of 100 yard group sizes. The Proof gun rarely goes below 0.6 MOA at 100.

 

[Snuby642]

Well you probably won't be the only one.

So you actually got 28.6 cfe into the case?

 

[Snuby642]

I have two 6 ARC AR's. One has a 22" Shaw barrel. It shot well with CFE 223, but was more temperature sensitive than Lever. I had to run it about 0.2 grains below what I originally thought was optimum to get the best balance of precision and temperature tolerance with CFE. My other 6 ARC has an 18" Proof CF barrel. It was not as temp sensitive to CFE 223, but it was not as precise as the Shaw gun. Most of my load development was on the 110 ATip, the 109 Berger and the Hornady ELDM. My first tests with Varget were just OK, but later on in development, I found a better process to size Lapua 6.5 Grendel brass and Varget became my favorite powder for the Shaw gun. It would shoot 5 shot groups below 0.4 MOA on the best days and was nearly always below 0.6. Most of my shooting with these guns is in the 400 to 1000 yard range, so I have not gotten a ton of 100 yard group sizes. The Proof gun rarely goes below 0.6 MOA at 100.

This is a new 6mm arc 105g Aeromatch bullet data thing. I don't believe it effects any others.

It doesn't seem data was adjusted for the new bullet dimensions I listed above.

Please don't confuse this with bashing Hornady, I really want to use this new bullet.

 

[db2000]

This is a new 6mm arc 105g Aeromatch bullet data thing. I don't believe it effects any others.

It doesn't seem data was adjusted for the new bullet dimensions I listed above.

Please don't confuse this with bashing Hornady, I really want to use this new bullet.

You can, just use LVR

 

[Snuby642]

You can, just use LVR

Let's see your ladder test groups and data where you put the max charge listed by Hornady of lever into the 6mm arc gas gun with the 105g Aeromatch bullet please.

Can you / have you ran lever compressed? I don't have any to test.

 

[db2000]

Yes compressed but not horrible

Seekins 18” Proof CF
Garmin Xero

3/22/23
55F 59% 30.31 in

Hornady 103 gr ELD-X
Lever
Hornady brass x 1
205M FGMM
BTO 1.6730
COL 1.4850
28.5 2509, 2539 SD 21 0.75”
29.0 2597, 2588 SD 6.4 0.75”
29.5 2643, 2619 SD 17 0.75”
30.0 2677
Minimal pressure circle

3/23/23
*2x fired brass
59F 82% 29.83 in
30.0 2699, 2686, 2701, 2684, 2690 SD 7.6 1.25” Min pressure circle
30.5 2700, 2706, 2719, 2703, 2728
SD 11.8 1” (4 0.75”) Mild pressure

10/20/25
63F 34% 30.11in

Hornady 105 Aeromatch
Lever
Hornady brass x 3
205M
COL 1.4900
BTO 1.6585
29.0 2595, 25792585, 2603, 2596 SD 8.6 ES 24 1.7” MLP-MDP
29.5 0 2629, 2623, 2619, 2641, 2651 SD 12 ES 32 0.9 MDP
*30.0 2647, 2665, 2665, 2698, 2657 SD 17 ES 51 0.6” MDP

 

[WeR0206]

COL 1.4850

Is this a typo?

 

[Snuby642]

Seekins 18” Proof CF
Garmin Xero

3/22/23
55F 59% 30.31 in

Hornady 103 gr ELD-X
Lever
Hornady brass x 1
205M FGMM
BTO 1.6730
COL 1.4850
28.5 2509, 2539 SD 21 0.75”
29.0 2597, 2588 SD 6.4 0.75”
29.5 2643, 2619 SD 17 0.75”
30.0 2677
Minimal pressure circle

3/23/23
*2x fired brass
59F 82% 29.83 in
30.0 2699, 2686, 2701, 2684, 2690 SD 7.6 1.25” Min pressure circle
30.5 2700, 2706, 2719, 2703, 2728
SD 11.8 1” (4 0.75”) Mild pressure

10/20/25
63F 34% 30.11in

Hornady 105 Aeromatch
Lever
Hornady brass x 3
205M
COL 1.4900
BTO 1.6585
29.0 2595, 25792585, 2603, 2596 SD 8.6 ES 24 1.7” MLP-MDP
29.5 0 2629, 2623, 2619, 2641, 2651 SD 12 ES 32 0.9 MDP
*30.0 2647, 2665, 2665, 2698, 2657 SD 17 ES 51 0.6” MDP

I'm pulling the bullshit card.
Col it's COAL and 1.49 it's not.

Pictures of groups?

 

[Dogtown]

I'm running 103 ELD-X w 28.5gr LVR @ 2.245" COAL....for reference.

 

[Snuby642]

And who's magazine are you using?

Ars only gets to 2.300 and you are way over that.

 

[Snuby642]

I'm running 103 ELD-X w 28.5gr LVR @ 2.245" COAL....for reference.

What are the dimensions for that bullet?

 

[db2000]

I'm pulling the bullshit card.
Col it's COAL and 1.49 it's not.

Pictures of groups?

You can pull whatever fucking card you want. COL is not COAL in my records. No need to be a dick in a reloading thread. I have a shit ton of reloading data all over the site so certainly don’t have to prove anything to a stranger on the the internet. FWIW my targets from 3/20 are already posted because it shot so well. I have 30 more loaded up to further my development. These cases aren’t trimmed to 1.49, that’s more average but they’re mostly close. I only take pics when they’re impressive. I just record the group size otherwise.

 

[WeR0206]

You can pull whatever fucking card you want. COL is not COAL. No need to be a dick in a reloading thread. I have a shit ton of reloading data all over the site so certainly don’t have to prove anything to a stranger on the the internet. FWIW my targets from 3/20 are already posted because it shot so well. I have 30 more loaded up to further my development. These cases aren’t trimmed to 1.49, that’s more average but they’re mostly close. I only take pics when they’re impressive. I just record the group size otherwise.


View attachment 8792363

I appreciate all the load data and results you post so please keep 'em coming. In his defense most people read COL as Cartridge Overall Length (it's the acronym Hornady uses in their load data) aka COAL. If your COL = case overall length then your #'s make much more sense to me. Sharing your CBTO doesn't help people b/c that number is relative to your bullet comparator gauge and isn't useful for others even if they have the exact same brand of bullet comparator.

When I share load data I always try to include the COAL so others can try and replicate my loads if they want.

 

[Snuby642]

I could use an explanation of how bto and the shoulder bump work together?
I'm not understanding .

As I see it I can leave the shoulder bump alone and run my ogive and over all length up and down within my chamber and available magazine space.

 

[WeR0206]

I could use an explanation of how bto and the shoulder bump work together?
I'm not understanding .

As I see it I can leave the shoulder bump alone and run my ogive and over all length up and down within my chamber and available magazine space.

Sorry I mistyped that part. I meant to say bullet comparator gauge instead of shoulder bump gauge

 

[db2000]

I appreciate all the load data and results you post so please keep 'em coming. In his defense most people read COL as Cartridge Overall Length (it's the acronym Hornady uses in their load data) aka COAL. If your COL = case overall length then your #'s make much more sense to me. Sharing your CBTO doesn't help people b/c that number is relative to your bullet comparator gauge and isn't useful for others even if they have the exact same brand of bullet comparator.

When I share load data I always try to include the COAL so others can try and replicate my loads if they want.

I appreciate all the load data and results you post so please keep 'em coming. In his defense most people read COL as Cartridge Overall Length (it's the acronym Hornady uses in their load data) aka COAL. If your COL = case overall length then your #'s make much more sense to me. Sharing your CBTO doesn't help people b/c that number is relative to your bullet comparator gauge and isn't useful for others even if they have the exact same brand of bullet comparator.

When I share load data I always try to include the COAL so others can try and replicate my loads if they want.

Yeah, it’s misused but also off by an inch from COAL so that should be a clue. BTO is what I use since the tips can vary. Anyway, that’s how I keep records for myself so…

 

[Snuby642]

This is what I check ogive with.
It matches up to manufacturer bullet spec's on quality bullets and with the aeromatch bullets perfectly matched the chamber drawing for where the lands start per Saami , best I can do.

I'm still in shock trying to figure out how db2000 figured out my wife's pet name for me.

I guess I'd like to know how hard it is to gut a magazine and channel out a receiver to get an extra
0. 100 thousand col for powder room.

Oh wait that's where women go, let's use case capacity instead

 

[Snuby642]

I also try to add bto since bullet tips vary and that's not hitting lands .

So if db2000 is over me daring to question how he crams an extra hundred thousands worth of consumables into the pipe of his 1/2 moa hole punch, I bet some people might give it a go.

I'm not competitive enough to bother just want to hit a 1 moa target to 1000 yards with a gun I built {assembled) and ammo I loaded before I die.

 

[db2000]

Remeasured everything and reloaded one to make sure I had not created an error somehow.
- Yes it’s compressed, which I was aware of.
- Yes it chamber’s and shoots excellent at 30.0 LVR and BTO 1.6585.
Here’s BTO 1.6610 and COAL 2.2805 and fits in ACS mag.
- Looks like we have another case of a mental masurbationer that doesn’t even own the powder he/she/it’s on here rudely questioning.
- Happy to provide photos in PM to anyone besides Snuby because I’m Snubbing and petty like that

 

[Snuby642]

Hmm...So it sounds like their reloading manual has a typo re: the 105 BTHP, it should be a COAL of 2.220" not 2.200"? A 20 thou difference is a pretty big change.

I was really curious what the COAL was on their factory black 105 BTHP, thanks for filling me in on that.

I apologize I fat fingered the coal on the factory bullet it is 2.200
Not the {2.220} I quoted.

I made a mistake.

Here is what 0.9g of cfe223 looks like in the dispenser pan.

So yes it will fit, but Berger bullet's says the 27.7 is their conservative max for it and gets 2426 fps on their 18" barrel. Their 105g hybrid is 0.0140 shorter. (From their pages) I have a 24" barrel
( probably where my wife got my nickname) and I hope for 2500 fps or more.

So I might have to use my girlfriend's vibrator to get the rest of the powder in the case. If my wife finds out my girlfriend has a vibrator she will come unglued.

Seriously two other people say they can here powder moving in the 27.7 filled case.

Now db2000 says he has a coal of 2.280 same as mine but a cbto of 1.6585 and mine is 1.5400 (my final answer).

My guess is wrong comperitor bushing in a Hornady tool. But don't tell db2000. Lol

Another correction my bullet's #24573 has a lot # of 2250982

I'll go shoot the ladder asap.

 

[r.tenorio671]

...FWIW, these are the average numbers for CBTO/COAL I used in my loads using converted Starline 6.5G brass during my powder tests. CAVEAT, these numbers are based on MY BARREL, yours can and will differ so take your own measurements. I used DURAMAG and E-Lander 6.5G magazines at the time and the rounds fit & fed with no problems when using these numbers (NOTE: DURAMAG had 'longer' internal space than the E-Landers). I used a Hornady comparator on digital calipers to derive the numbers. I measured 6 decimal points but will just list to the 3's. This data is from 2022.

-Nosler 70gn Varmageddon: 1.6415 / 2.121
-Nosler 105 RDF: 1.687 / 2.255 (W748)
-Nosler 105 RDF : 1.679 / 2.245 (Lever)
-Berger 95 Classic Hunter: 1.686 /2.157
-Berger 95 VLD : 1.660 / 2.257
-Berger 105 VLD Target : 1.659 / 2.255
- Hornady 108 ELDM : 1.684 / 2.250
- Hornady 90 ELDX : 1.655 / 2.167
- Hornady 87 VMAX : 1.661 / 2.130

After firing numbers of base growth and shoulder growth was, BASE: 0.047, shoulder: 0.006. Powder used was Lever but tested 1 batch of RDF's with W748 and the Nosler 70gn VG was with 8208XBR.

YMMV

 

[Snuby642]

Nice useful info for all, thanks.

I'm thinking of trying the 95g hunters next just in case I need to stretch out for game (management purposes) (4 days waiting for another trophy whitetail to move out of the way for a several year old Spike) but not likely, good to have a backup plan.

Hunting management game hiding behind beautiful trophies is the toughest hunting I have ever done.
Suited best for older hunters without a huge competitive drive.

I think mostly the 105g target ammo is what my gun will see.
Ready for any reasonable challange, not necessarily competition.

 

[r.tenorio671]

Nice useful info for all, thanks.

I'm thinking of trying the 95g hunters next just in case I need to stretch out for game (management purposes) (4 days waiting for another trophy whitetail to move out of the way for a several year old Spike) but not likely, good to have a backup plan.

Hunting management game hiding behind beautiful trophies is the toughest hunting I have ever done.
Suited best for older hunters without a huge competitive drive.

I think mostly the 105g target ammo is what my gun will see.
Ready for any reasonable challange, not necessarily competition.

....my experience was that secant bullets tend to eat up more case volume (seated deeper) and have more jump due to magazine restriction, so "jump" tolerant bullets might be something to look for in YOUR barrel. Berger has an article on their website stating having more jump with VLD bullets is viable. My testing, was basically to confirm function of my upper assembly and generate some fireformed brass, break-in the barrel and test for pressure using published load data (mostly). Accuracy was a side note during that session, but overall everything did print well. The Berger 95 VLD had the smallest group and according to my notes, that load had a jump of 0.0733. Again, accuracy was not the objective of the day...function, pressure & barrel break-in were. Attached are a couple pics, the Berger 95 VLD target, the Hornady 108 ELDM target, where my brass ejected to (was same for all loads) and some pics of the brass condition for the heavier pills, and brass from the highest loads. By no means am I a great rifleman, but when it comes down to it, "minute of meat" will serve my purposes....