• Watch Out for Scammers!

    We've now added a color code for all accounts. Orange accounts are new members, Blue are full members, and Green are Supporters. If you get a message about a sale from an orange account, make sure you pay attention before sending any money!

VERY disappointing results .223 w/TAC & 77 SMK's

BgBmBoo

Gunny Sergeant
Supporter
Full Member
Minuteman
As the title says...went out before the rains started and tried some TAC w/77gr SMK loads.

Best "group" was with 25gr. but it is still far from anything I would call acceptable. The rifle shoots sub 1/2" groups with factory 40 and 50 grain loads.


Rifle is a 20: JP CTR-02 with 1:8 twist barrel. Below is a pic of the groups with powder charge.
Brass is many times fired Black hills match. CCI 400 primers.

Let me know your feelings. I am thinking of trying Varget and RL-15 my next time out. I also have some 69gr SMK's as well as Nosler 77gr.

Take care,Stan

 
Re: VERY disappointing results .223 w/TAC & 77 SMK's

Try some once fired brass out of your chamber. Looks like a brass problem to me. Several of my rifles will open up and start having flyers after the brass begins to harden.
 
Re: VERY disappointing results .223 w/TAC & 77 SMK's

I have the best results with RL15 on 60gr and heavier projectiles.
 
Re: VERY disappointing results .223 w/TAC & 77 SMK's

my thoughts are .....maybe more joy w/55grn amax....mostly because of the 8 twist
 
Re: VERY disappointing results .223 w/TAC & 77 SMK's

I would try winchester primers before giving up. The ball powders I have worked loads up for liked the hotter ignition. CCI magnum primers(start low again and work up as per load manual recommendations) also have worked well for that. I have spoke with several guys loving tac for 5.56 ammo load.
 
Re: VERY disappointing results .223 w/TAC & 77 SMK's

Thanks guys. Well I am looking for a 600 yard load. The 40 and 50 grain Vmax,Blitz Kings,Nosler BT, shoot VERY weel (see pics below) out of this rifle but asking one of those bullets to shoot small groups at 600 yards is a bit much IMHO.

I will try some RL-15 and see how that plays out. And if that does not fly then I will try with some 69gr SMK's.

Take care,Stan



 
Re: VERY disappointing results .223 w/TAC & 77 SMK's

I'm having good luck w/77 Noslers CC's w/23.0 grs of RL-15-Using CCI #41 primers w/Hornady brass-1-9 twist
 
Re: VERY disappointing results .223 w/TAC & 77 SMK's

I've had simalar results trying to get 69gr SMKs to fly with varget. My 1-8 RRA just dont like em. 60gr Sierra Varminters, over some H335 shoot the best for me.
 
Re: VERY disappointing results .223 w/TAC & 77 SMK's

My 600 yard XTC load is 80SMK, LC brass, CCI #41 primer, 24.0 gr Re15.
 
Re: VERY disappointing results .223 w/TAC & 77 SMK's

Stan,

Try some of the Nosler's too. They shot tighter than the SMK's in my rifle. The Hornady's shot horribly.

Different gun. Different results, but something to try. And they're cheaper.
grin.gif


FWIW, most of the guys I know using TAC are not that worried about precision. The paper puncher/varmint guys are using Varget, with a couple flirting w/RL15.

John
 
Re: VERY disappointing results .223 w/TAC & 77 SMK

I would try some RL15 before I did anything; try 24.2 grs with the 77 smk if you believe your lot of RL15 is of average burn rate.

If you still get poor results I would check the twist rate of the barrel with a tight patch and a cleaning rod.
 
Re: VERY disappointing results .223 w/TAC & 77 SMK's

I also have the Ctr-02. I shot 69gr. smk over 23.7 H335. SUb 1/2 groups at 100 yards.
 
Re: VERY disappointing results .223 w/TAC & 77 SMK's

I am thinking some new brass will get you the more desireable results you are looking for.
 
Re: VERY disappointing results .223 w/TAC & 77 SMK's

CCI 400 primers do not belong in any AR-15. They are too soft.

Spherical powders typically require magnum primers, per the reloading manual.

I do not use anything besides magnum primers in my AR-15s, and I highly suggest that you do the same OR use the primers designed for military rifles with floating firing pins.

Although I don't think that any spherical powder will produce 600 yard accuracy, if you want to try it, using the proper primer is essential.
 
Re: VERY disappointing results .223 w/TAC & 77 SMK

I routinely got sub half MOA groups using AA 2230 and AA2460 with Rem 7 1/2 primers (non-magnum, non-thick cup) and in 12 years of using 7 1/2s to the tune of thousands of rounds a year never have experienced a slam fire.

So much for absolutes. CCI 400s are a fine primer for the AR - use them with impunity. If you want to stick with ball powder and the heavier bullets, get hold of some AA2520. Its burn rate is a better match.
 
Re: VERY disappointing results .223 w/TAC & 77 SMK

Stan,

Somewhat off track...

I know you have some terrific bolt guns. Have you reloaded for a gas gun before? Just curious if you've checked for adequate neck tension to prohibit setback? Are you chrono'ing? The new brass thing made me think about neck tension. A long shot.

I always single feed my new gas gun loads. That way when I mag feed them for the first time and I have some weird result, I know where to start.


John
 
Re: VERY disappointing results .223 w/TAC & 77 SMK

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: _9H</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I routinely got sub half MOA groups using AA 2230 and AA2460 with Rem 7 1/2 primers (non-magnum, non-thick cup) and in 12 years of using 7 1/2s to the tune of thousands of rounds a year never have experienced a slam fire.</div></div>

Just because you've never experienced catastrophe does not make it safe for you to load something that is not safe or tested in a reloading manual.

AR-15s are designed to load from the magazine. If you're going to single load, especially, a slam fire is a real risk. Do yourself a favor and chamber a round, let the BCG slam home, and then eject it and look at it. It'll have a pretty big dent in the primer. Why would you risk it when a magnum primer costs the same and is designed precisely for that?

An out of battery detonation an destroy your rifle and cause serious injury to you and/or a bystander. 50,000 PSI within inches of your face ought to warrant serious consideration of what you're doing, regardless of past stupidity/ignorance of what is called for in a reloading manual.

I have never seen any published data for ball powders that did not require magnum primers. Additionally, I have never seen a reloading manual that did not have a section dedicated to informing reloaders that military rifles do not have spring loaded firing pins and require harder primers.

If you want to follow unsafe loading practices yourself, fine. Just make sure I'm nowhere near you when you're firing, and don't advise others. AR-15s require harder primers, and ball powders typically also call for magnum primers.

Powder manufacturers don't pay ballisticians and buy all that fancy test equipment to create these load recipes for nothing. They do it to assure that their products can be used safely and within the specs for a given cartridge.
 
Re: VERY disappointing results .223 w/TAC & 77 SMK

Hi John.
I have thought about that and am going to order a "sled" so I can single feed it.

I do load for my AR's w/40 and 50 grain bullets for coyotes and such and they shoot sub 1/2" groups.

I am going to try different powders and some 69gr bullets and take your advise and single feed for the next batch.

Take care,San
 
Re: VERY disappointing results .223 w/TAC & 77 SMK

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BgBmBoo</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Hi John.
I am going to try different powders and some 69gr bullets and take your advise and single feed for the next batch.
</div></div>

When you try the lighter bullets (68-69g) you might also try both a secant ogive (Hornady) and a tangent ogive (Nosler/SMK). Your rifle may have a preference. The tangents *tend* to be more forgiving, especially loaded to mag length, but you never know...

Ultramax makes a 68g HP load (yeah, I know...
crazy.gif
) that literally shot 1 ragged hole from my MP15 at 100 yds. I have not been able to even come close with my handloading efforts to duplicate this load and it uses what appears to be the Hornady 68g bthp. Go figure...

John
 
Re: VERY disappointing results .223 w/TAC & 77 SMK

Stan,

If another powder doesn't get you more accurate results. I'd recommend 9H's suggestion of actually checking your twist rate. 1:8 "should" shoot the 77's well - SMK's or Nosler CC's.

These powders should all work well for your loads.
Varget - with a drop tube
RL-15
AA2520
TAC*

* - I've seen too much variance from one rifle to the next. Some rifles work with it, some not so much in .223.
 
Re: VERY disappointing results .223 w/TAC & 77 SMK

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: mavrick10_2000</div><div class="ubbcode-body">1:8 "should" shoot the 77's well - SMK's or Nosler CC's.</div></div>

I agree. I certainly would not give up on the 77's yet. But you *might* get some 69's to run right off. OR you could end up changing so many variables you'll want to beat yourself over the head with your heavy barrel.
grin.gif


Just be smart and methodical, don't change everything at once and write EVERYTHING down. You'll get there.
wink.gif


John
 
Re: VERY disappointing results .223 w/TAC & 77 SMK

Thanks guys....I have never really enjoyed hand loading...well ok...the case prep part of it at least.
The only real reason I started was I was shooting a 6XC and had to reload for it. That settled in VERY easy and fast...I think I had my load in 20 rounds.

I will keep at it. I have a bunch of powder and primers to play with so we will see.

Take care,Stan
 
Re: VERY disappointing results .223 w/TAC & 77 SMK

Something to consider trying... find a Lee taper crimp die or something similar and try around 23.5gr TAC with a mild crimp. Actually, try adjusting the crimp die down in small increments until you find a setting that works (shoots well).

Several years ago I wanted to duplicate some Black Hills 75gr 'blue-box' loads that shot like a friggin' house-afire from my Service Rifle AR. By all accounts, they used TAC, or something very near to it.

I went through the whole load workup schtick like you just did, up past 25gr, and got almost the exact same results - crap.

I took five remaining BH 75gr rounds and pulled the bullets, determined to find out what exactly was in them. They all had 23.4-23.5gr of something that looks exactly like TAC. The catch was... those bullets were put in there to *stay*. I mean, I couldn't get them to budge using a kinetic (hammer) puller. I had to go get a collet puller, and literally *crush* the bullet to get enough of a grip to pull it.

I suppose you could get the same effect with some crazy neck tension setting while sizing the cases.... but I think that'd have some serious adverse effects while seating the bullets. I know the old mantra is 'never crimp match bullets' - I'd heard it dozens of times before. But... it was pretty obvious that if these factory rounds weren't actually 'crimped', they were the next best thing too it! So I chose the taper crimp die in lieu of the factory crimp die (which does more of a 'roll' to grip a cannelure) as it should be somewhat less abusive to the projectile.

I loaded up a series of five shot groups starting with no crimp, and then adjusting it in slightly for each subsequent batch. After a couple groups you could see them tighten right up, just like the factory match ammo I'd been chasing. Something about that particular bullet/powder combination just needs a higher start pressure to get cookin' properly, I guess
laugh.gif


It may work for you, or it may not. I know several other people here have tried it after I suggested it and have had good results from it.

YMMV,

Monte
 
Re: VERY disappointing results .223 w/TAC & 77 SMK's

I have found that You really have to step on 77 SMK's to get those really tight groups. Don't bother to pick up my brass to reload @ the 300Yd line..........
 
Re: VERY disappointing results .223 w/TAC & 77 SMK

Speaking of paid ballisticians, I just hung up the phone with Paul Box of Sierra. He did the testing for their current loading manual testing the 223 in the AR-15. It took him 2 weeks of 9 hour days. Sierra has separate data for the 223 in bolt and AR rifles by the way, so these comments are specific to their AR testing.

With the 77 SMK, he tested 12 different powders, ball and stick. All testing was done with the Remington 7 1/2 primer. No slam fires ocurred during testing, not for this edition nor for previous editions of their manual.

There are no notes in their book regarding CCI 41 primers nor magnum primers with ball powder regarding AR15 223 data.

Maybe I need to start hanging out on AR15.com so I can get real smart about this stuff.
 
Re: VERY disappointing results .223 w/TAC & 77 SMK

Maybe Mr. Box could learn a thing or two on the subject fromAR15.com as well...
smile.gif
 
Re: VERY disappointing results .223 w/TAC & 77 SMK

My AR comp. load with 1/8 and 69 smk is 26 GR. VARGET in commercial brass loaded to 2.255 oal. What I've found is most rifles like the load. I have a slower load with 25 gr. of Benchmark @ 2670 fps out an 18" barrel.
 
Re: VERY disappointing results .223 w/TAC & 77 SMK

LOL..yeah...I am looking into building a new .243 built on a BAT repeater action.

308...the 25 grain load was fine but at the 25.2 grain it was showing some flattening of the primers. So for this rifle I would say 25gr. would be as hot as I would want to go with. And...it was only 55 deg. outside as well. So come summertime....when it is 115 (that is a avg. summer day here) that might be to much as well.

I will post my results with the 69 grain bullets.

Take care,Stan
 
Re: VERY disappointing results .223 w/TAC & 77 SMK

24.0 is the max load for TAC in the Sierra manual, sounds like most accurate load would be below 24.0.
 
Re: VERY disappointing results .223 w/TAC & 77 SMK

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: dan46n2</div><div class="ubbcode-body">24.0 is the max load for TAC in the Sierra manual, sounds like most accurate load would be below 24.0.</div></div>

I started with 23, 23.6,24 and then went up to 25 and 25.2...best group was at 25 grains. If you look at the target above it shows this.

Take care,Stan
 
Re: VERY disappointing results .223 w/TAC & 77 SMK

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Downzero</div><div class="ubbcode-body">CCI 400 primers do not belong in any AR-15. They are too soft.

Spherical powders typically require magnum primers, per the reloading manual.

I do not use anything besides magnum primers in my AR-15s, and I highly suggest that you do the same OR use the primers designed for military rifles with floating firing pins.

Although I don't think that any spherical powder will produce 600 yard accuracy, if you want to try it, using the proper primer is essential.</div></div>


Well after reading your post I went back through the Sierra manual and did not see anywhere where it recommends this. So I then broke out the Hornady and Nosler and look at their service rifle data...they call for Winchester small rifle primers. No where do I see them saying it is dangerous or even them recommending magnum primers.

In fact here is some info below from 6mmBR.com on the subject as well as Sierra's AR-15 load guide. Not trying to argue with you but your statement is pretty "aggressive" and would like some more facts on the use of magnum vs standard primers for use in AR-15's.

Take care,Stan


http://accurateshooter.net/Downloads/sierra223ar.pdf

For use in semi-automatics and AR15s, we advise that you stick to CCI and Remington primers. These brands have harder cups and are much less likely to pierce primers. Also, the AR15 has a free-floating firing pin that dents the primer on loading. This creates a risk of slam fires. So you want hard primer cups. The latest generation of Winchester primers, with brass-colored cups, should be avoided for AR15 use. The old silver Winchester primers worked fine, but the current WSRs are soft and can be pierced more easily than CCI or Rem primers. A poll of Highpower competitors (mostly shooting ARs) showed that Rem 7 1/2 primers are the most popular (33.23%), followed by CCIs (25.78%). The majority of CCI users favored the CCI BR4s, but both CCI 400s (small rifle standard) and CCI 450s (small rifle magnum) were also popular. Only 10.25% of Highpower shooters polled used Federal primers (either 205M or 205). At the time of the poll, many shooters reported using WSRs, but this was the older version with silver cups. See NationalMatch.us website for complete poll results.

For maximum protection against primer piercing and slam-fires, CCI also markets the #41 military primer. Possessing a very hard cup, with decreased sensitivity, #41 primers are designed to resist slam fires in rifles lacking firing pin retraction springs. In a bolt-gun or semi-auto AR-15, it is not necessary to use #41 military primers. But this is an appropriate option for some military applications.
 
Re: VERY disappointing results .223 w/TAC & 77 SMK

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BgBmBoo</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: dan46n2</div><div class="ubbcode-body">24.0 is the max load for TAC in the Sierra manual, sounds like most accurate load would be below 24.0.</div></div>

I started with 23, 23.6,24 and then went up to 25 and 25.2...best group was at 25 grains. If you look at the target above it shows this.

Take care,Stan </div></div>

Yes, I see that... is it possible your powder thrower is off? Did you weigh each load?
 
Re: VERY disappointing results .223 w/TAC & 77 SMK

I use a ChargeMaster so I doubt it was off by THAT much. Reload for .243, 6XC, .223 for my bolt guns, .308,etc., and have had no issue with charge weight accuracy.
If you go back up through this thread there are others using the 25 grain load as well. As well as some using a full grain over max on VArget. The key is to work it up and keep a eye open for pressure signs. Again I had zero sign at 25 but at 25.2 was getting primer flattening.

Take care,Stan
 
Re: VERY disappointing results .223 w/TAC & 77 SMK

Stan,
I ran a White Oak 20" NM service rifle for a while with a 1:6.5" 3-groove Pac-Nor that would very consistently shoot cleans at 200 and 300. My loads were 77gr SMks in LC-00 1x and 2x brass with Rem 7 1/2 primers and 23.5gr TAC.

All I can say on your results is that some rifles shoot it and some don't, I guess. Keep hunting a heavy-bullet load for yours. I had good results with Re15, 2495BR, H4895 and Varget with 69gr and 80gr bullets.

BTW, when we shot a match at Parris Island, we used BH 52grSMK blue box ammo. That stuff shot some very nice scores at Inchon Range's 500yd line IIRC.
 
Re: VERY disappointing results .223 w/TAC & 77 SMK

I think the 1/8 should handle the 77 just fine, my load with Tac is 24.5 but I use CCI 450's from an 18" 1/8 twist, anything else and groups open up..alot
Only targets I had in the file are @100Yrds

IMG_1368.jpg
 
Re: VERY disappointing results .223 w/TAC & 77 SMK

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BgBmBoo</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Well after reading your post I went back through the Sierra manual and did not see anywhere where it recommends this. So I then broke out the Hornady and Nosler and look at their service rifle data...they call for Winchester small rifle primers. No where do I see them saying it is dangerous or even them recommending magnum primers.
</div></div>

I double checked just for you, and sure enough, my Speer manual definitely specifies magnum primers for H335 and BLC-2.
 
Re: VERY disappointing results .223 w/TAC & 77 SMK

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: dan46n2</div><div class="ubbcode-body">24.0 is the max load for TAC in the Sierra manual, sounds like most accurate load would be below 24.0. </div></div>]

WRONG!

only testing the individual rifle will reveal this. Some loads are ABOVE book max, and are tack drivers. Those same loads are totally SAFE IN MY RIFLE!
 
Re: VERY disappointing results .223 w/TAC & 77 SMK

Well I am making some progress. I was able to beat the ran and get back out to the range.

I tried the 77gr SMK's with RL-15. Looks like I can still go up a bit. I am going to try 24.5 the next time. 24.3 gave me the best groups. I started at 24.1 and went to 24.3. No pressure signs at all.

We shall see. But at least I feel a little better.

Take care,Stan

PS...center target was all me.






 
Re: VERY disappointing results .223 w/TAC & 77 SMK

Most manuals load a .223 Remington not a 5.56 round. The pressure difference is significant. There are a lot of rifles mande for .223 that can not handle the increased pressure. Most AR's are made with 5.56 components. The chamber may be cut for .223, 5.56, Wylde, etc. This leads to manuals loading for lower pressure than AR's are made for and many "hot" loads. The "standard" load for High Power rifle is 24 grains of either Varget or Reloader 15 and a 77 SMK. This is over loaded for .223 but with in 5.56 pressure.
 
Re: VERY disappointing results .223 w/TAC & 77 SMK

Stan, for sure you can go up in powder over 24.2. Notice though that if you shot a large number of groups in the 24.1, 24.2, and 24.3 they would most likely look about the same. What I see on the paper above with a handful of 5 round groups is primarily shooter induced error (as you pointed out about the middle pic), not necessarily load differences, given the statistically small sample.

Once you are at a "node" or "sweet spot" in the burn rate then the load becomes much less picky about temperature and actual throw weight +/- a tenth. That is where I am at 24.2, and where it appears you are as well. BTW I do heat them up a bit into the 24.5 range for my Mk262 Mod 0 "clone" ammo so that the velocity approaches that of the real thing, though it is difficult the replicate the real velocity using commercial powders safely.

Glad the RL-15 gave you better results. The rest of us will hold all night rituals involving virgin chicken sacrifices in an attempt to ward of the slamfire demons while you complete your testing sans CCI 41 primers.

The only slamfire AR-15 story I can relate that has taken place in the last oh 6 years (and in excess of a half million rounds fired by AR-15s) within my local shooting community involved too hot of loads and WSR primers. The gentleman in question was running way too hot of a load. The primers don't really pierce - they blow a very small puck of primer material back into the bolt thru and in the shape of the firing pin hole. These pucks can accumulate to the point that they jam the firing pin up inside the bolt. In this guy's case the rifle would still function. After 2 slam fires in a row, single loaded and muzzle pointed at the ground, he stopped shooting to investigate the cause.

In another instance a friend had a rifle that would not go into battery on the firing line at a match. The bolt was jammed up in the carrier. I pulled his BCG out, disassembled it with some force, and literally hundreds of pucks fell out onto the ground. His was due to a powder lot change of AA2230C that required a reduction of a full grain of powder to get them back in the safe range. His did not slam fire, but the potential for it was surely there.

A mechanically jammed firing pin was the cause in the first case and would have been the cause in the second case. CCI 41 primers would not have prevented it in either case, though one could argue that they can deal with hot loads better than the WSRs.
 
Re: VERY disappointing results .223 w/TAC & 77 SMK

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: _9H</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> virgin chicken sacrifices </div></div>

This begs the question: do chickens have sex? If so, will it make me a better marksman?

 
Re: VERY disappointing results .223 w/TAC & 77 SMK

On the issue of TAC, I have had nothing but good results with my fireforming loads and my "full-house" loads in my 223ai. Granted, it's a bolt gun, but your AR seems to be quite accurate. I am sure that I can shrink the groups a bit more by playing with neck tension, or seating depth, or trying another powder, but I am quite happy with TAC...especially the availability.

I am surprised to hear of your results with this powder.

My load is 26.1 TAC, cci 400's, and 75 amax at 2.480" LOAL. My chronograph showed 3050 fps, and I was able to squeeze .75 consistently...which is pretty darn good for me.
 
Re: VERY disappointing results .223 w/TAC & 77 SMK

Oh there is LOTS of shooter induced error going on in the last few groups. I was shooting from the prone and using a wadded up sweatshirt as my rear bag (forgot my proper bag at home) and the weather was pretty cold.

The proper range (concrete benches,etc.) I normally use is under about 6+ feet of snow right now.

So until then...this load will have to work for the 600 yard match I plan on shooting in in a few weeks.

Take care,Stan
 
Re: VERY disappointing results .223 w/TAC & 77 SMK

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: JPipes</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: _9H</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> virgin chicken sacrifices </div></div>

This begs the question: do chickens have sex? If so, will it make me a better marksman?

</div></div>

SHHH... don't let me secret get around!!

Oh and Stan, clearly you could do a lot worst than that 24.3 grs of RL-15 for your 600 yd match. If it were me I'd load a bunch of them and shift my focus to wind reading and hard holding. Good luck at the match.
 
Re: VERY disappointing results .223 w/TAC & 77 SMK

I'm just curious, Do you shoot your groups round robin? I see that you're using an incremental method of some sort.

Some of you guys have some pretty amazing groups for autoloading rifles.
 
Re: VERY disappointing results .223 w/TAC & 77 SMK

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Supa_Fly</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: dan46n2</div><div class="ubbcode-body">24.0 is the max load for TAC in the Sierra manual, sounds like most accurate load would be below 24.0. </div></div>]

WRONG!

only testing the individual rifle will reveal this. Some loads are ABOVE book max, and are tack drivers. Those same loads are totally SAFE IN MY RIFLE!</div></div>
Wil did you see what 77 grain smk with TAC did at the last match we shot
didn't seem to be a problem in fact drove real nice holes at 500