Thanks, Dawgdad. I will check this out in more detail this weekend and report back. I'm going to do load development in Rem and Win brass in parallel as I don't have that much time to work out a load and get confidence in it. I need to have a good load right out of the starting gate (by my second range session).

Have you ever looked at the Quick load software? If you take the time to make the correct inputs it is scary good at predicting results. I am always bugging a friend of mine to find out where the "Hiroshima" line is in a load.

Not cheap at about $150 but you can make that up in components if you use it often.

www.neconos.com/category/Software-2

Dawgdad, I've had folks make some runs for on 6.8mm SPC loads that the data I received was so far off it was disappointing. What loads they listed as "will blow your gun up" turned out to be a good starting load and I worked up from there. Also, since I'm looking for the accuracy node, not max muzzle velocity, not sure that this program will be much help. I've been wildcatting non-typical powders and bullet weights in the 6.8 and have developed other processes for determining chamber pressures by measure case web expansion of new or once-fired brass. But if have this program and would like to sway me on using this for my .270, I am open.

With QL, you need to do the work up front and measure case capacity etc rather than go with defaults. with any software it is GI-GO. with the amount of tinkering you do with different loads, it may be able to help you wade through some choices. My experience is from running it backwards..i.e I found a good load and had it run on QL for pressure prediction and it usually comes back as an optimized load.

I got an unexpected bonus a while back and used it justify the purchase of QL. It's not perfect, and it's better at predicting outcomes with bottleneck cases than straight walled but I'm not sorry I spent the money on it. I've helped a few people develop non-standard loads with it. In fact, I just got a data update for this Christmas. So I now have the newer IMR Enduron powders, ELD-X bullets, etc.

Chris Long validated his "Optimal Barrel Time" theory using QuickLOAD, a chronograph, and the PressureTrace system. I've used it to short-cut some load development. It's not perfect, and Dawgdad is right: Garbage-in = Garbage-out. The better the inputs, the better the results.

Dawgdad wrote:

Slim - use your comparator tool and check the base to ogive variation and compare it to the OAL variation in the bullets.

Dawgdad, I didn't have a comparator small enough to do the ogive on a .277 bullet. I used a sized 6.8mm case and it looked like variation was 0.004" min-max but that was "wax and string" as the Brits would saw. When reloading, the best I could control COAL to was 0.007". I just couldn't live with that and would adjust them slightly to be within 0.003". Winchester brass held another 0.5 grain of powder but concentricity was around 0.002 instead of 0.001" with the Remington brass. We will see how they shoot.

The weather broke yesterday and we had a nice afternoon so headed to the range. Only was able to work at 100 yards because of range closures. I was pretty much pleased with the outcome. Did two single powder charge velocity ladders and found the accuracy node after 5 shots with Winchester brass. 59.5, 60.0, and 60.5 all grouped within 0.2 inches. Add the 61.0 grain charge (right most of the cluster of four) and 4 sequential shots were still under a 1/2 inch. Completed the ladders just to gain experience with the new bullet. (recording the points of impacts while sitting at the bench shown in the lower right as an example). Adjusted my crosshairs for 60.0 grains of Enduron 7977 at the end of the session. The impacts with Remington brass where not as tight but it looked like the accuracy node is right around 2800 fps at this COAL which was maximum mag length for my Tikka T3 Lite. Pressure signs were noticeably less than my LRX load. Not sure I could get any faster with IMR4350. Since I may be hunting with this load next month, I'm going to stick with what I have and do some long-range work out to 500 yards next weekend. If everything hangs together, I should be ready for the hunting trip.

I did a quick terminal performance test and the lead-core was shed at 100 yards. Penetration was more than adequate and impact force created a water slug that broke the plywood platform for the water jug which has only happen before with a .300 Win Mag. I need to do a full terminal test series using the alternative bullet trap as the lead core may be harder than ABLR but is still soft.

slim me old mate....they are an A-MAX in all but name, the new darling of the longer range crowd and from all acounts they ok up close too...... expect meat damage...but you cant make an omlet without breaking eggs.
finaly they are in a decent calibre,look forward to seeing what your testing reveals.....
there is a new kid on the block that might well be a game changer for the guys who have to run lead free DRT it sounds like they are a copper jacket and various weight powder type cores...from the photos Ive seen they preform much like the above types but a little more volitile.....still good enough for big game and frangible enough for longish range,.270 pills are 152grns I think it is.

Elvis wrote:

slim me old mate....they are an A-MAX in all but name,

Yep, the ELD replaced A-Max for the .308. The ELD-X has a mechanical lock on the lead core that the ELD doesn't have but it is still sheding its core.

slimjim wrote:

Dawgdad wrote: Slim - use your comparator tool and check the base to ogive variation and compare it to the OAL variation in the bullets. Dawgdad, I didn't have a comparator small enough to do the ogive on a .277 bullet. I used a sized 6.8mm case and it looked like variation was 0.004" min-max but that was "wax and string" as the Brits would saw. When reloading, the best I could control COAL to was 0.007". I just couldn't live with that and would adjust them slightly to be within 0.003". Winchester brass held another 0.5 grain of powder but concentricity was around 0.002 instead of 0.001" with the Remington brass. We will see how they shoot.

Slim, if you think about it...loading for true consistency.... OAL doesn't mean crap other than they look good in the box. The jump to the lands is what you are tweaking when you change your OAL. This is what you are changing in order to shrink the group. And... the seater die should not press on the tip in most die sets. It is conical and engages the profile of the bullet towards the ogive. That said with most secant ogive bullets like the A-max /ELD profiles standard seater dies can bottom out before the side of the cup hits the edge of the bullet. I took and A-max and lapping compound and modified the seater on a Lee die so that it mated properly on the profile of the bullet. Even with that I got the 0.010" or so OAL variation but the base to ogive ( which is what really counts) was dead nuts on within 0.001". The 0.010" was the same variation I saw when i measured the bullet OAL. When measuring the base to ogive, it was clear that all of that variation was from the ogive to the tip.

Most shooters I know have a comparator because we set up the single load long range stuff to be 0.020" jump and we need a way to measure throat erosion over a season. Before I got a comparator...I only used the caliper to set OAL... after I got the comparator... I only check OAL if it is going into a magazine.

Dawgdad, I an with you 100% on this. I check the .308 178 ELD-X and they were precise in OAL and base to ogive. Not these .277 ELD-X. I went and recheck them. The majority are +-0.002" in OAL (not as good as the .308) but a few of .277 bullets are 0.006" to 0.008" over the average of the group that is close together. Still working to get a bullet comparator for the .277 bullets.

Dawgdad, I will be changing my loading process based on your recommendations when I get the comparator.

slimjim wrote:

The weather broke yesterday and we had a nice afternoon so headed to the range. Only was able to work at 100 yards because of range closures. I was pretty much pleased with the outcome. Did two single powder charge velocity ladders and found the accuracy node after 5 shots with Winchester brass. 59.5, 60.0, and 60.5 all grouped within 0.2 inches. Add the 61.0 grain charge (right most of the cluster of four) and 4 sequential shots were still under a 1/2 inch. Completed the ladders just to gain experience with the new bullet. (recording the points of impacts while sitting at the bench shown in the lower right as an example). Adjusted my crosshairs for 60.0 grains of Enduron 7977 at the end of the session. The impacts with Remington brass where not as tight but it looked like the accuracy node is right around 2800 fps at this COAL which was maximum mag length for my Tikka T3 Lite. Pressure signs were noticeably less than my LRX load. Not sure I could get any faster with IMR4350. Since I may be hunting with this load next month, I'm going to stick with what I have and do some long-range work out to 500 yards next weekend. If everything hangs together, I should be ready for the hunting trip. I did a quick terminal performance test and the lead-core was shed at 100 yards. Penetration was more than adequate and impact force created a water slug that broke the plywood platform for the water jug which has only happen before with a .300 Win Mag. I need to do a full terminal test series using the alternative bullet trap as the lead core may be harder than ABLR but is still soft.

Slim,

Thanks for the info after testing these. It seems as though what I originally asked about may be true. The ELD-X seems to have a fairly soft lead core and is somewhat susceptible to jacket/core separation.

I've seen Hornady's videos online showing perfect performance, but its nice to have someone who can test and post their results.
For that, I say again. Thank You!!

try the ELD-M 178grn????..... its all horses for courses
a projectile that comes apart up close might just be perfect out further
a projectile that holds together up close might just pencil through out long.
the happy medium is the holy grail
there are are far too many people now using the AMAX/ELD projectiles with great results out long and in close for me to poohoo them.
the heavy pills are delivering enough payload to take animals down cleanly.

Elvis wrote:

try the ELD-M 178grn????..... its all horses for courses a projectile that comes apart up close might just be perfect out further a projectile that holds together up close might just pencil through out long. the happy medium is the holy grail there are are far too many people now using the AMAX/ELD projectiles with great results out long and in close for me to poohoo them. the heavy pills are delivering enough payload to take animals down cleanly.

Elvis,

That's the rub here. The ELD-X has been touted as the perfect bullet to use whether up close and personal or at long range. While it seems to make some advances, it doesn't seem to me that the "all range bullet" has been discovered.

I was hoping to find someone that has used it on-game, but I still have yet to hear from anyone who has used it in a hunting situation, other than the reviews you can find on the manufacturer site. Call me a skeptic, or as my wife terms it, a "cynical azzhole" but it's pretty easy to manipulate info on your own website.