[Davy]

We were fortunate to have another 1000 yard session with the Savage on Saturday. Last time at 1000 my wife did well given her inexperience. This time, with the wind fishtailing from 12 o'clock and also jumping around from 3 and 9 o'clock at varying speeds just to make things interesting, she still beat me by 2 points. Admittedly, I read the wind wrong too many times and didn't shoot well anyway that day, but she and the Savage and those 90gn Berger VLDs finished the job. She scored 83% of the possible and one experienced .223 shooter who had previously been quite sceptical mentioned that he had a mind to try some of those Bergers himself. His rifle is 1:8 but it has a 30 inch barrel - don't know if that will help him. Berger recommend a 1:7 twist (as in our Model 12 with its 26" barrel). If he has a go and it works out for him, I will post the results.

This second session at 1000 tends to confirm that we have a (at our level) resonably competitive .223 which can be used successfully from 300 out to 1000. The cases show no major signs of pressure issues and it is not a compressed load (using AR2208 which is equivalent to Varget - but don't quote me on that). I chrongraphed a small sample of these at 2410 fps. However, JBM ballistics calculator rates them at 1149fps at 1000 yards. With JBM stating the speed of sound at 1136fps, there is not much margin for error. Perhaps it may be time to cautiously increase the load (no more than 0.2gn at a time) and see if that helps to increase the margin without causing excess pressure.

Meantime, and particularly with our temparate to hot weather here most of the year, it looks like the Bergers are shooting accurately out of the Savage 1:7 without too much trouble all the way to the far end of the range.

Still have a lot of load testing to do and will post results when time permits.

 

[Davy]

Determining optimum seating depth.

If you have been following this thread, I have made no secret of the fact that I really like Berger (both the company and the 90gn VLDs). The following article from the Berger website (Getting the Best Precision and Accuracy from VLD bullets in Your Rifle | Berger Bullets) challenged me to find out if I could find a sweet spot for seating depth using the Berger method but applied to the Sierra 80gn SMKs I was reloading for 300-800 yard use (Berger 90VLDs used for 900-1000 yards).

If you read the article it suggests four seating depths for experimentation: .010 inches jammed into the lands; .040 jump; .080 jump; and .120 jump.

WARNING: the above article is related specifically to Berger VLDs. I applied its ideas to a different projectile at my own risk. There is no suggestion actual or implied in this post that any of my procedures or results will be in any way applicable or safe in your rifle! Loading heavy projectiles into the .223 has considerable potential for creating hazardous pressures which may cause serious injury or death.

Mindful of the possibilities, I proceeded with caution by, firstly, rechecking the OAL in the Savage using an 80gn Sierra SMK in a Hornady OAL guage. It came back confirmed at 1.992". I set my first test batch at 1.993" (I was not keen on jamming a Sierra SMK .01 into the lands - so the first batch was set up just kissing the lands by the minimum 'jam' of .001"). The remaining three test batches were loaded at the depths suggested by the article. The article confidently predicts that one of those seating depths will emerge as a clear winner. The question for me was whether it would work in my rifle and if I could shoot well enough to see a difference.

Note that while the .001 'jam' (more like a touch than a jam) and the .04 jump were outside the mag length, but the .080" seating depth just fit the Savage 12VLP magazine; similarly, of course, the .120" seating depth, but there was a potential red flag in that even with a starting load of 22.3gn of AR2208, the bullet was deep enough to exert a slight degree of compression on the load. Given that my starter load of AR2208 was only 0.3 of a grain above ADI's recommended starting load of 22gns of AR 2208 (in my rifle - not necessarily in yours - that is a very a mild load indeed), one of the potential dangers of reloading heavy bullets in .223 became immediately obivious: the risk of a significant reduction in case capacity with a concomitant threat of very high pressures caused by an apparently innocent seating of the bullet to magazine depth! So watch it, because there is a potential for this round to bite the hand that loads it! Similarly, at the other end - minimum seating depth - too much jam with an overly optimistic charge of powder filling the resultant space may easily produce high pressures as well. You are between a rock and hard place and must proceed carefully - that's what I tell myself anyway. You have to measure, recheck, and think it all through very carefully. The motto 'Who Dares Wins' does not apply to reloading long bullets into a .223 case for use in a stock standard factory rifle!

Even allowing for my battered hearing, shaking the loaded .001 (jam) and .040 (jump) seated rounds close to my ear (It worked for Steve McQueen in The Magnificent Seven!)allowed me to feel and hear the very reduced powder charges sloshing around inside the cases. It was more difficult with the .080 sample and undetectable with the .120 seating depth. Part of my reloading equipment inventory includes a stethescope retained from a past life. Applying this device to the .080 produced clearly audible and lively powder movement sounds; however, an additional 40 thousandths of an inch to get to the .120 load produced the sound of silence. In short, the bullet had stabilised the powder movement; in effect it was a lightly compressed load: not necessarily a deal breaker but already I knew that seating .120" with an 80gn SMK was likely to be out of the question for a long range load in my rifle.

BTW, I don't rely on the stethescope - there are other sounds that can mimic the presence of powder, like movement of the stethescope tubing for example or the rustling of a coat sleeve. I only use it for additonal confirmationary info - if I am in any doubt, the bullet gets knocked out and the case gets visually checked.

'Say aahh!' The stethescope confirmed what I had already determined by other conventional and approved means: the bullet was in contact with the powder. I would never use such a device as the definitive method to confirm the critical presence or amount of powder in a case. There is no substitute for a visual check. When in doubt, tap it out - otherwise your friendly, neighbourhood paramedic may have to use his/her stethescope on your 'case'.

With the rounds, chronograph and my notebook ready it was off to the 100 yard range.

Newly acquired TAB bags worked a treat and were a big improvement on my improvised DIY efforts ranging from bricks to bags of Pakistani rice.

I dry-fired a few times using a practice round to settle myself down and then fired the first live round of the .001 (jam) batch. It missed! What the...???? The last time the rifle was used was at 1000 yards. The little Redfield scope has no way of indicating how many full turns it has on it. I wound it down one full turn to produce the single hole in the centre diamond. Good. On paper! I wound down 2MOA which put me just under .5 MOA too low. The 80gn 100 yard zero is 1.75MOA lower than the 90gn setting. The Redfield 3-9X40 had dutifully returned me to the 90gn 100 yard zero. I always rave about that little scope. Every day I expect it to go belly up after all the use and abuse it has got, but it still does the job. If it went west tomorrow, I would have nothing to complain about for around $240 dollars!

Three fouling shots were fired using the range/competition load of 23.3gns of AR2208 in a Lapua case with an 80gn SMK loaded .02 off the lands (standard primer). Group size was .44". With the rifle all fouled up so to speak, the testing started. I fired three rounds for each seating depth for a total of six rounds each (first three on Target 1, see immediately below) and second three on Target 2, then move on to the next seating depth.

Target 1. The group on top right is three rounds: 2 in one hole plus one to the left which I knew was a bad one even as I fired it.

Target 2. Three shots on Target 1 for .001 seating depth then another three on Target 2 on the same (relative) target location. Then record results in the notebook and repeat for the next seating depth and so on. Good fun and good practice too, I reckon.

The results are in the table below:

SEATING DEPTH TEST (100 yards) Savage 12VLP (.223 Remington) Sierra 80gn SMK – AR2208 22.3 gns. (Varget equivalent???) Lapua case; CCI 405 (magnum) primers​
Seating Depth ( inch)​	Application​	Shot 1​	Shot 2​	Shot 3​	Average​	Extreme Spread​	Group (inch)​
.001 Jam​	First​	2618​	2647​	2613​	2626​	34​	.8​
ditto​	Second​	2657​	2648​	2619​	2641​	38​	.43​
.04 Jump​	First​	2621​	2609​	2618​	2616​	12​	.73​
ditto​	Second​	2611​	2639​	2660​	2636​	49​	.38​
.08 Jump​	First​	2611​	----​	----​	----​	---​	1.1​
ditto​	Second​	2606​	----​	2599​	2602​	93​	.55​
.12 Jump​	First​	2622​	2592​	----​	2607​	72​	1.1​
ditto​	Second​	2619​	[9294*]​	2569​	2594​	50​	.83​
*Cells marked ‘---‘ indicate inaccurate readings secondary to failing light. Note for example, 0.12 jump, second application, Shot 2: 9294 fps!

One of the issues affecting the results is that I am not capable of shooting precise groups; there is always the risk that some of the data was compromised by bad shooting. Another was the failing afternoon light which, I suspect, caused some rather suspect readings from the chronograph! Even so, some general trends emerged to influence my reloading of this round:

1. There is no advantage to reloading this round just touching the lands. Good. That eliminates the risk of pressure secondary to jam. But note the consistent extreme spread.
2. The article called it correctly, one seating depth did stand out as the best: .04 off the lands. Good. Given that this was just a starting load, I had no desire to reduce case capacity and increase pressure by loading the bullet .080 or, worse, .120 (which was already mildly compressed).
3. The second application was invariably more tightly grouped than the first.
4. Extreme spread did not correlate to group size predictably at at 100 yards. I intend to use JBM ballistics calculator to see what difference it would make at 800 yards.
5. Bullets loaded closer to the lands worked better than those loaded further away.
6. This is a miniscule sample and while I now have some guidelines, the info/data is not necessarily conclusive by any means!




My next installment will, hopefully, take the us to the next step of working up a load using the .040" seating depth.


Any constructive criticism or advice would be very much appreciated as this is very much a new venture for me.

Cheers


Davy

 

[Davy]

The Ladder Test

This test was prompted/inspired by the following articles:

Target Sports

Long-Range Load Development

Currently, the load used for 300-800 yards is 23.3gns of AR2208 (Varget equivalent?) with an 80gn SMk seated .02 off the lands (soon to be altered to .04 as per the seating depth test in my previous post) in Lapua brass and using a Federal 'Champion' standard primer. ADI's reloading guide suggests 22 as a starting load with 25 as the maximum and the expectation of a muzzle velocity range between 2545 and 2870 fps in a 24 inch barrel. My rifle is 26 inch so I could expect to see (perhaps) another 50 fps added on at each end of that continuum. So, very roughly, around 2600 might be considered a lower end of the market velocity. In doing some very quick and basic load development I discovered that the primers began to show signs of cratering and flattening as low as 23.3 grains. As this load was taking the bullets out to 800 yards and my wife was gleefully chasing my own Schmidt and Bender delivered scores with the $240 Redfield I kindly donated to her, I decided to leave well enough alone.

The question still niggled however: how come I was getting cratering and (some) flattening at the lower end of the reloading charge weights? One answer was that each rifle is different and my wife's .223 was likely to hit maximum early on. There is a reason reloading manuals have a minimum starting load. But I couldn't shake the feeling that my reading of the rifle/load interaction was based, possibly, on a false assumption. It was a safe assumption to work from, but what if that load was much milder than I has assumed? The first article (above) by Laurie Holland suggested that standard primers in .223 cases loaded with heavy bullets often gave a false impression of pressure by cratering and flattening prematurely - the answer to this was magnum primers. Now if this premature cratering and flattening was happening in my wife's rifle, then there were alternative loads higher up the scale which might be more accurate and have a longer reach.

That's where the second article on the 'ladder test' got me in the mood to confirm or deny my assumptions. Unfortunately (or perhaps fortunately given my rather average shooting skills) I could only apply the test at one hundred yards but I now had an optimum seating depth (at least provisionally) and wouldn't it be great to take it to the next level regarding load development via the ladder test!

So the purpose of the ladder test was to:

1. Determine the maximum safe load
2. Find at least one sweet spot or 'accuracy window' (see Jason Baney's article - very informative)
3. Determine if the standard primers were conveying misleading signals regarding pressure (as per Laurie Holland)

The 23.3gn loads my wife was using disturbingly well out to 800 had never been chronographed. But having confirmed that they were whipcracking supersonic down at the butts 800 yards away, I used JBM's ballistic calculator (and the MOA elevation for 800) to reverse guestimate an MV of around 2650fps. This proved very close to the mark as the tests below will reveal. I was really excited to find out what those round were really doing.

The chrony sensors were mounted on a SLIK tripod with a quick release plate attached. Normally I use that highly adjustable tripod as my shooting rest by simply locking the rifle cradle into it. You can get that stuff from Precision Rifle Solutions (owned by an ex-Marine sniper and his wife). They are great people to deal with (and no I don't have shares in their company). The PRS tripod and those quick relase plates make for a really versatile piece of equipment. The TAB bags under the butt also worked great for me, so that was another hassle out of the way (and no, I don't have shares in their company either).

With regard to setting up, I took great care to bore sight the target and make sure that the chrony was not going to take a bullet. I we all had $10 for every chronograph shot in the line of duty we would be all be pretty rich. It is very easy to blast the chrony and I know plenty of careful and responsible individuals who have done so.

Anyway, here are the results of my efforts:

LADDER TEST (100 yards) Savage 12VLP (.223 Remington) Sierra 80gn SMK – AR2208 (Varget?) – Fed 205 ‘Champion’ (std) primers​
Charge Weight​	Shot 1​	Shot 2​	Shot 3​	Average​	Extreme Spread​	Group (inch)​
22.3​	2567​	2517​	2552​	2545​	50​	.75​
22.5​	2606​	2580​	2575​	2587​	32​	.78​
22.7​	2616​	2595​	2607​	2606​	21​	1.02​
22.9​	2642​	2611​	2616​	2623​	31​	.83​
23.1​	2675​	2655​	2673​	2668​	20​	.51​
23.3​	2677​	2660​	2664​	2667​	17​	.59​
23.5​	2709​	2689​	2678​	2692​	31​	.71​
23.7​	2760​	2744​	2725​	2743​	35​	.50​
23.9​	----​	2702​	-----​	-----​	-----​	.98​
24.1​	2790​	2735​	----​	2763​	55​	.52​

As you can see the the 22.3 grain load (the first lot) produced velocities close to what ADI predicted (with allowance for my 26" barrel). Sure enough, a sweet spot or accuracy window did appear to open up at 23.1 grains and close out at 23.5. I would disregard the encouraging 24.1 result because it was only two rounds. I was so convinced that the loads would reach maximum safe well before 24 grains that when I found I had only two cases left, I didn't bother to load any more of them beyond filling the last two with 24.1.

Unfortunately, the data is affected by my average shooting skills and note the contradiction that the .75" 22.3 load produced a .43" group when I was doing my seating depth tests (see previous post)! So this data should not be taken as gospel - far from it. However if we look at the general trend in relation to my purposes then:

1. Determine the maximum safe load

While all cases showed evidence of flattening and cratering of primers not one of those cases was difficult to extract. The chronographed speeds suggest that the loads were not particularly hot and that Laurie Holland's findings regarding premature cratering and flattening were applicable to my rifle. THEY MAY NOT BE APPLICABLE IN YOURS, of course, so proceed with caution. As the last rung of the ladder was at 24.1 without other evidence of excessive pressure, this ladder test failed to determine the maximum safe load. See image below.

2. Find at least one sweet spot or 'accuracy window'

While shooter error may complicate the issue somewhat with inconsistent shooting of groups, there was, nevertheless, an obvious climb for every .2 grain increment until we reached 23.1. At which point, the climbing ceased despite increases in powder charge until we passed 23.5! I therefore conclude this rifle has a sweet spot or accuracy window between 23.1 and 23.5.


3. Determine if the standard primers were conveying misleading signals regarding pressure (as per Laurie Holland)

See comments under 1. above and the chart analysis in my next post (the next thrilling installment).

Conclusions

The current load of 23.3 grains is within the accuracy window and has produced encouraging group measurements (see my next post). It has proven itself effective out to 800 yards. While an extension of the ladder out to 24.3 and beyond to the safe max IN MY RIFLE is a project for the future, 90gn Berger VLDs get the job done effectively at 900 and 1000. There is, therefore, no pressing need to increase pressures, decrease case life and accelerate throat erosion when a comparatively mild load within the accuracy window is accomplishing all that is required of it. Just as the seating depth of .04 jump allows a margin of error in the COL (not too long, not too short) so too does this moderate load allow a safety cushion in terms of an error when throwing, trickling or weighing the charge. And thus, as noted in the Jason Baney article, it appears that the load has a tolerance of .2 grains up or down without significant alteration in POI - thanks to that sweet spot. At this stage, 23.3 of AR2208 (Varget??) at .04 off the lands, COL in my rifle being 1.952 with an 80gn SMK would appear to be a good working load (COL meaning from the base of the case to the ogive contact with the Hornady bullet comparator.). Minor fine tuning will be an interesting challenge for the future and maybe it is now time to do a test for the best possible primer. While the standard primers do the job, I will shift to magnum primers when the standard ones are used up. See my next post for an analyis of the effects of changing to magnum primers in my wife's rifle - the Savage 12 VLP 1-7 twist.

The climb up the ladder begins at the bottom left of Target 3, continues up the left side to Target 1, crosses to the right and continues down the right side to the bottom right of Target 2 at 24.1. Note that there were only two shots fired for that final 'rung'.

The 'sweet spot'. Note that from 23.1 to 23.5 there is no appreciable change in POI. Then at 23.7 the loads get on the move again, climbing emphatically above the red dot and maintaining that climb to 24.1. I suspect another sweet spot at the upper range of the safe load continuum is possibly attainable before max is reached but that will have to wait and is certainly not (now) a priority given the reassurance the recent data has given me regarding the current working load.


Regards


Davy

 

[Widowmaker0001]

Nice write-up Davey and honestly that is a classy stick you got yourself there' Goodshootin'

~Reagan

 

[Davy]

The end of it - for now...

With a working seating depth and powder load established, it only remains - at least for now - to mop up a couple of pressing questions regarding the above data:

1. As the orginal load was .02 seating depth, will a shift to .04 be better or worse?

2. Will the shift to magnum primers have a significant effect on pressure and accuracy?

The following info in the table below (backed by the pics and some visual observation of the primers) provides some (very) provisional info to go on for me to go on for the meantime:

Group sizes in relation to: .02/.08 seating depth and Standard vs Magnum primers (100 yards) Savage 12VLP (.223 Remington) Sierra 80gn SMK – AR2208 23.3 gns. (Varget?) Fed 205 ‘Champion’ (standard) primers CCI 450 (magnum) primers​
Seating Depth (inch)​	Primer​	Shot 1​	Shot 2​	Shot 3​	Shot 4​	Shot 5​	Average​	Extreme Spread​	Group (inch)​
.02 Jump​	standard​	2652​	error​	2686​	2687​	2704​	2680​	52​	.44​
ditto​	ditto​	2703​	2692​	2691​	2698​	2681​	2693​	22​	.54​
.04 Jump (neck-sized)​	standard​	2627​	2638​	2652​	2662​	2662​	2648​	35​	.55​
ditto * FL resized​	magnum​	2686​	2671​	2672​	_____​	_____​	2678​	15​	.60​
*Three shot group only.

Conclusions:
1. There is no appreciable difference in accuracy between .04 and .02 jump with these loads in this rifle. The shift to .04 merely puts the load more centrally into the seating depth sweet spot.

2. There was no significant increase in muzzle velocity with the magnum primers in this test group. HOWEVER! Check the post on seating depth and note that the average MV for magnum primed 22.3 grain loads of AR2208 was 2626fps compared to 2545 fps for 22.3 grain loads with standard primers in the ladder test. A shift to magnum primer should, therefore, involve a high degree of caution, as conclusions based on limited samples may be dangerously misleading. For my current, moderate 23.3grain load IN THIS RIFLE there is no indication that a shift to magnum primers will cause any problems pressure wise.

3. It was possible to visually identify the fired magnum primers from the standard. They evidenced perceptibly less flattening and cratering and are, therefore, seemingly more robust and less likely to send premature pressure signs. EQUALLY, they may possibly serve to mask excessive pressures if one pushes the envelope to far and does not excess caution in building up to the maximum safe load. Reliance on one indicator alone is, therefore, not advisable and one should seek the big picture regarding pressure signs using as much information as possible. Just as an aircraft crash is rarely the result of only one cause, evidence of pressure issues (or the lack thereof) may be and should be gathered from multiple sources not just the state of the primer. Whatever the facts maybe, the presence of flattening and cratering is evidence that the primer is getting a work out. CAUTION with reloading heavy bullets into the .223 - especially in a factory rifle - is absolutely essential.

4. While the test batch of magnum primed cases (only three rounds) indicated a 0.6" group, previous tests during seating depth determination produced groups as low as .38". A shift to magnum primers is, at worst, unlikely to reduce accuracy and, in all probability, may well improve it in this rifle with that load.

5. Never kiss a chicken on the lips. (Sorry, just checking to see if you're still awake. God knows I wouldn't blame you if you weren't....)

The group in the centre diamond under Lincoln is five shots with a standard primer at the .04 seating depth. And the group at bottom right under FDR is five shots with a standard primer at .02 seating depth with groups sizes of .55" and .54" respectively. I believe the rifle can do better but I will need develop more skill first.

The centre diamond has the three shot magnum group at 0.6". This group is not indicative. Previous tests for seating depth produced sub-half moa groups. (See the pics on the Seating Depth post.) For a view of the groups in the above pics without presidential cover ups, see the main ladder picture in the Ladder Test post.


Well, that about wraps it up. There will be more testing and practicing to do but I think most of my questions - and maybe some of yours - have now been answered regarding the Savage Model 12 VLP with 1-7 twist. I am really glad we have this beautiful rifle to compete and experiment with. My wife, with minimal practice, has already defeated me at 1000 yards with this rifle and 90gn VLD loads using a budget Redfield scope versus my Rem 700 in 308 and an S&B on top of it. So while that may not say much about my shooting ability, I am very certain, nevertheless, that it does say a lot about the quality of this out of the box rifle. It truly is a pleasure to shoot and to work with. Now...armed with my newly aquired data, I'm off to reload some ammo for my wife. Now, where exactly was that nice sour spot on the accuracy ladder again.... Sorry! Did I say sour? I meant sweet. Brother Alvin wouldn't approve of me throwing my integrity out of my own accuracy window!




I gotta do me a ladder test for my 308 afore I take another whippin from that 223....

 

[Davy]

Nice write-up Davey and honestly that is a classy stick you got yourself there' Goodshootin'

~Reagan

Thanks Reagan. I found the effort to shoot those groups to the best of my ability to be very demanding. Definitely had to invoke the confidence factor! I look forward to having a go at these tests again with the Remington 700 but that will have to wait a few months now.

Regards and thanks again

Davy

 

[Widowmaker0001]

Thanks Reagan. I found the effort to shoot those groups to the best of my ability to be very demanding. Definitely had to invoke the confidence factor! I look forward to having a go at these tests again with the Remington 700 but that will have to wait a few months now.

Regards and thanks again

Davy

No prob, PMed u. Cheers'

~Reagan

 

[hoagymaster]

View attachment 1250

That is a seriously good looking rifle. I am a sucker for wood stocks and will be buying one to put on my savage eventually. Excellent write up, very detailed and interesting. and you are right about the whole not kissing a chicken thing. wish i had read this post sooner. but that is a story for another day. Thanks again!!

 

[Davy]

Thanks for your support there, Hoagymaster. I'm glad the thread was of some interest to you. Initially I wasn't very taken with the look of the Savage but the more I see it now the more I like it. Hope your intended stock change works out.

Regards in the meantime


Davy

 

[hoagymaster]

It would look even better with a stainless finish on the scope to match the barrel/action/bolt/trigger guard. not very "tactical" but realistically it is being used in competitions, not shooting terrorists.

I will be doing some of the tests you have done in terms of powder charge and seating depth soon. just found some varget on the shelves last week so that will be the test powder (I hear it is good for 22-250). I only have 1:12 twist though and found it has trouble stabilizing 60 grainers, so I will have to stick to the lighter bullets for the time being.

 

[Davy]

I believe that Varget is the same as AR2208 but I never like to say for sure. It is supposed to be a temperature stable powder from what I read somewhere. I look forward to the test report. Here's some more info on ladder tests which I found useful:

Developing An Accurate Load

Cheers


Davy

 

[jose92399@yahoo.com]

Thank you for the informative review. I just sold my Savage 12VLP DM 308 only because of the recoil. I am searching for a 223 that could possibly take me to 1000 yards like me 308 w/o the heavy recoil. I found the same model but in a 223 and a surprising 1:7, since I can no longer find rifles in either 1:8 or 1:7 (Tikka or CZ) I was told the that twist is not longer imported. At any rate, I am going to find a dealer selling the Savage VLP DM in a 223 1:7 twist and buy it.

And with the bullet information you provided, you and your wife will save me lots of time figuring out the loads, travel time and gas driving 160 miles round trip where I allowed to shoot to 1000 yards legally here in USA, Barstow, California.

 

[Drag]

Davy -

I know this is an older thread, but a sincere THANK YOU for taking the time to not only comprehensively record but also share in clear understandable detail all of your findings. This thread is an incredible resource to the worldwide shooting community.

I applaud you!

Drag
Dupage County, IL, USA

 

[bobwks]

Very interesting write up on your Savage 223. 1/7 twist with the heavier bullets. I bought exactly the same rifle and are very happy with it.My favorite load is Hornady 80 gr.VLDs with IMR 4320 Dupont powder.This powder is about 35 to 40 years old but still works just fine.I did a load ladder experimenting with charge weights and oal. I must single feed as the throat is long.Where the boattail starts is where the neck and shoulder meet for a col of 2.550".I have shot hundreds of rounds with the same brass and trim at the 5th or 6th firing with exellent brass life.PMC brass.I am getting 2994 fps average with exellent accuracy and no excessive pressure signs.