MePlating
- Thread starter PowderMeasure
- Start date
Re: MePlating
Nope. Too much work, and too expensive of gear for the questionable improvement in accuracy based on the type of shooting I do.
It may work for a 1000 yard bench rest shooter, but for me, it isn't worth the extra money...plus, I haven't seen any INDEPENDENT testing on precisely how much accuracy is supposed to improve.
Nope. Too much work, and too expensive of gear for the questionable improvement in accuracy based on the type of shooting I do.
It may work for a 1000 yard bench rest shooter, but for me, it isn't worth the extra money...plus, I haven't seen any INDEPENDENT testing on precisely how much accuracy is supposed to improve.
Re: MePlating
powdermeasure,
What sort of accuracy improvement are you after here? Meplat uniforming is really only applicable to 1000 yard shooting, and will be all but unnoticable at shorter ranges. It doesn't really "improve" accuracy per se, but simply uniforms the BCs standard deviations and extreme spreads. It reduces the BC somewhat, which is why you'd need to both uniform <span style="text-decoration: underline">and</span> point the bullets to get the most advantage out of the process. Yes, it makes a difference, and it can be a significant difference in some lots of bullets. If you're looking at this for hinting applications, or anything closer than the 1,000 yard line, save yourself the expense, time and trouble.
powdermeasure,
What sort of accuracy improvement are you after here? Meplat uniforming is really only applicable to 1000 yard shooting, and will be all but unnoticable at shorter ranges. It doesn't really "improve" accuracy per se, but simply uniforms the BCs standard deviations and extreme spreads. It reduces the BC somewhat, which is why you'd need to both uniform <span style="text-decoration: underline">and</span> point the bullets to get the most advantage out of the process. Yes, it makes a difference, and it can be a significant difference in some lots of bullets. If you're looking at this for hinting applications, or anything closer than the 1,000 yard line, save yourself the expense, time and trouble.
Re: MePlating
Its just really something I have been curious about due to researching. Always trying to gain an edge and it seemed to be very sensible to do as far as common sense concerned. However, as you have stated, I believe it is not worth my time until I decide to shoot further than the 1,000 yard mark. The Sierra bullets have the most consistancy at the tip being flat etc. Nosler's have a slight slant at the tip and the Berger VLD's look to have a slant at the tip as well. However, I have not held a VLD in my hand like the Noslers. I also here alot about the VLD's being suberb. I would assume this will not matter out to say 500 yards but could only wonder out further than that. I appeciate the input and wish to here more input.
Its just really something I have been curious about due to researching. Always trying to gain an edge and it seemed to be very sensible to do as far as common sense concerned. However, as you have stated, I believe it is not worth my time until I decide to shoot further than the 1,000 yard mark. The Sierra bullets have the most consistancy at the tip being flat etc. Nosler's have a slight slant at the tip and the Berger VLD's look to have a slant at the tip as well. However, I have not held a VLD in my hand like the Noslers. I also here alot about the VLD's being suberb. I would assume this will not matter out to say 500 yards but could only wonder out further than that. I appeciate the input and wish to here more input.
Re: MePlating
Meplat uniforming will improve the standard deviation of the bullets BC by dropping the BC to a nominal controlled area. So by reducing the outlying flyers, yes the will fly truer than without uniforming.
Pointing the bullets after meplat uniforming can bring the BC backup or in some cases increase it, but pointing the bullets requires a sort of swedging process which can deform the bullet. It takes a bit of adjustment and some trial and error to achieve the right amount of "point" without deforming the jacket, but once it's done they are definately more consistent.
Now having said all that and going through all research into acquiring information, process and dies....I switch to A-max.
Meplat uniforming will improve the standard deviation of the bullets BC by dropping the BC to a nominal controlled area. So by reducing the outlying flyers, yes the will fly truer than without uniforming.
Pointing the bullets after meplat uniforming can bring the BC backup or in some cases increase it, but pointing the bullets requires a sort of swedging process which can deform the bullet. It takes a bit of adjustment and some trial and error to achieve the right amount of "point" without deforming the jacket, but once it's done they are definately more consistent.
Now having said all that and going through all research into acquiring information, process and dies....I switch to A-max.
Re: MePlating
PM,
It shows up at distances less than 1k, mostly in decreasing vertical. A-MAX have their own problems, like where did that flyer come from? Use it where you've already done things to increase consistency.
HTH,
DocB
PM,
It shows up at distances less than 1k, mostly in decreasing vertical. A-MAX have their own problems, like where did that flyer come from? Use it where you've already done things to increase consistency.
HTH,
DocB
Re: MePlating
I shot 168 Sierra BTHP with 42.5 gr and shot all around a 10x10 plate at 600 yards. couldn't get my center. However I had two winds blowing different directions from a lake. Even my benchrest bud had a horrible day. Most likely not a good day to change my stuff. I am looking for different loads hiders are using to help find my "sweet spot" before moving out to longer shots. Amax??? I have no experience with. yet
I shot 168 Sierra BTHP with 42.5 gr and shot all around a 10x10 plate at 600 yards. couldn't get my center. However I had two winds blowing different directions from a lake. Even my benchrest bud had a horrible day. Most likely not a good day to change my stuff. I am looking for different loads hiders are using to help find my "sweet spot" before moving out to longer shots. Amax??? I have no experience with. yet
Re: MePlating
I have the Whidden pointing system and have used it, along with meplat uniforming, and found it gave me about a .5 MOA improvement in vertical. I should mention that this was at ranges from about 600yds and out as I have not shot them at shorter ranges.
It is a bunch of work but I generally reload either at night or during other times when I couldn't be out shooting anyway. I have found that in comparing SMKs vs Scenars that the SMKs seem to benefit more from it, especially uniforming the meplats but I honestly can't say that anything I have done is "scientific" enough to call it fact - more just observations over a few hundred rounds of both SMKs and Scenars that were processed in a similar fashion.
I have the Whidden pointing system and have used it, along with meplat uniforming, and found it gave me about a .5 MOA improvement in vertical. I should mention that this was at ranges from about 600yds and out as I have not shot them at shorter ranges.
It is a bunch of work but I generally reload either at night or during other times when I couldn't be out shooting anyway. I have found that in comparing SMKs vs Scenars that the SMKs seem to benefit more from it, especially uniforming the meplats but I honestly can't say that anything I have done is "scientific" enough to call it fact - more just observations over a few hundred rounds of both SMKs and Scenars that were processed in a similar fashion.
Re: MePlating
I shoot A-max's in my 308, so no need there. However, I have been told that bigger calibers benefit from it more, but doesn't really show up until past 600 yards. I meplat uniform the bullets that I shoot in my 338 Lapua Mag.
I shoot A-max's in my 308, so no need there. However, I have been told that bigger calibers benefit from it more, but doesn't really show up until past 600 yards. I meplat uniform the bullets that I shoot in my 338 Lapua Mag.
Re: MePlating
Sounds like you are getting the answers that you were looking for. I have uniformed and pointed before for 600yard matches but I did not notice a huge difference. It is a lot of work, like someone else said shooting more will probably be more beneficial.
Sounds like you are getting the answers that you were looking for. I have uniformed and pointed before for 600yard matches but I did not notice a huge difference. It is a lot of work, like someone else said shooting more will probably be more beneficial.
Re: MePlating
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 427Cobra</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You'll see a better improvement from less time reloading and more time shooting. </div></div>IMHO Off topic answer.
I believe a better contribution would have been whether you actually tried it or that it does not fit your style of shooting.
From my perspective, the unnecessary part was the suggestion that he shoot more. Like when you used this comment on me, you don't know how much he shoots vs. how much time prepping components for reloading and you don't know what style of shooting.
It is my belief that your message is lost in your accusatory form of dialog.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 427Cobra</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You'll see a better improvement from less time reloading and more time shooting. </div></div>IMHO Off topic answer.
I believe a better contribution would have been whether you actually tried it or that it does not fit your style of shooting.
From my perspective, the unnecessary part was the suggestion that he shoot more. Like when you used this comment on me, you don't know how much he shoots vs. how much time prepping components for reloading and you don't know what style of shooting.
It is my belief that your message is lost in your accusatory form of dialog.
Re: MePlating
I don't process the meplat of my projectiles... yet
As noted those that do process the meplat are long distance shooters where 'not enough improvement' does not compute. Any improvement that results in a gain is an improvement and constant improvement is the goal.
A %10 improvement is still an improvement. it all depends on your goals.
As an example, with no relation to actual improvement percentages:
If you gained %10 by processing the meplat, %10 by neck turning, %10 by weighing your charge more accurately, %10 by deburring and uniforming your primer pockets and %10 by sorting your brass to a uniform volume then you have made a "potential" %50 improvement in the accuracy of your cartridge.
Still as an example from above. If 'you' were shooting consistent 1 MOA with out any of the above, then one at a time introduced each of these processes in your reloading program and at the end of the testing 'you' were shooting 1/2 MOA, was it 'worth it' to do the meplat processing?
That is up to 'you' and your goals.
For those tempted to get all pedantic about my example. I said it wasn't 'real'. However, I have used the technique of continual improvement in a large number of commercial and recreational activities. My real world example is from my stock Wby Vanguard 223. As specified by the manufacturer it was a definite 1 1/2 MOA firearm with 'premium' factory ammo. Through making continual 'not much' type improvements, it is solidly now .3 MOA with my loads and I can use it in my local 'tactical' matches without embarrassment.
Meplat processing does make a more consistent projectile, that can not be argued and that has to contribute to a more consistent cartridge which has to contribute to higher accuracy potential.
Is it 'worth it'. First you have to define accuracy and what your goals are.
It certainly wouldn't be worth it for a 3 gun but some other form of shooting, only you can decide for your self....
I don't process the meplat of my projectiles... yet
As noted those that do process the meplat are long distance shooters where 'not enough improvement' does not compute. Any improvement that results in a gain is an improvement and constant improvement is the goal.
A %10 improvement is still an improvement. it all depends on your goals.
As an example, with no relation to actual improvement percentages:
If you gained %10 by processing the meplat, %10 by neck turning, %10 by weighing your charge more accurately, %10 by deburring and uniforming your primer pockets and %10 by sorting your brass to a uniform volume then you have made a "potential" %50 improvement in the accuracy of your cartridge.
Still as an example from above. If 'you' were shooting consistent 1 MOA with out any of the above, then one at a time introduced each of these processes in your reloading program and at the end of the testing 'you' were shooting 1/2 MOA, was it 'worth it' to do the meplat processing?
That is up to 'you' and your goals.
For those tempted to get all pedantic about my example. I said it wasn't 'real'. However, I have used the technique of continual improvement in a large number of commercial and recreational activities. My real world example is from my stock Wby Vanguard 223. As specified by the manufacturer it was a definite 1 1/2 MOA firearm with 'premium' factory ammo. Through making continual 'not much' type improvements, it is solidly now .3 MOA with my loads and I can use it in my local 'tactical' matches without embarrassment.
Meplat processing does make a more consistent projectile, that can not be argued and that has to contribute to a more consistent cartridge which has to contribute to higher accuracy potential.
Is it 'worth it'. First you have to define accuracy and what your goals are.
It certainly wouldn't be worth it for a 3 gun but some other form of shooting, only you can decide for your self....
Re: MePlating
Fred S,
Congrats on reducing your groups from .5 to .3 MOA.
Fact is the improvements in group size due to all the little things handloaders do are hard to quantify in the context of shooting; way too many variables.
Some can possibly separate the improvement directly attributed to meplate uniforming from the large number of factors that go into putting bullets downrange. The Huston warehouse project is one example, unlimited BR is another. Bipod loading, wind, trigger control, breathing, cheek weld.... for my skill level all the tiny improvements are lost in the wetware induced noise.
OFG
Fred S,
Congrats on reducing your groups from .5 to .3 MOA.
Fact is the improvements in group size due to all the little things handloaders do are hard to quantify in the context of shooting; way too many variables.
Some can possibly separate the improvement directly attributed to meplate uniforming from the large number of factors that go into putting bullets downrange. The Huston warehouse project is one example, unlimited BR is another. Bipod loading, wind, trigger control, breathing, cheek weld.... for my skill level all the tiny improvements are lost in the wetware induced noise.
OFG
Re: MePlating
A little clarification on my previous post:
I go to all the extra effort only on my 338LM and even there I don't do it on all. I mainly began looking in to it and doing it when I compared both 250gr and 300gr Scenars vs their SMK counterparts and saw how ragged the SMKs appeared in comparison.
As to what I have observed in terms of an improvement it seemed to be pretty consistant across both 250 and 300gr SMKs.
My method was really quite simple. I pulled 100 SMKs from a box of 500 so I would be working with the same lot. I opened a new box of Lapua 338 brass so those were all from the same lot. I grabbed a new box od 100 primers so they were all from the same lot. Powder was from the same cannister.
50 of the SMKs got meplated and pointed, 50 did not. Charges were thrown using an RCBS ChargeMaster so there may be a bit of variation there within its degree of accuracy.
Bullets were seated and measured for both length and runnout. I tried to get two sets of ammunition put together that were as identical as I could, within reason, with the only difference being the extra work done to the SMKs prior to seating.
Alternating between the two batches it seemed to clearly show the there was an improvement as mentioned in my other post. Can I say it is worth it? Not sure but given that I do my reloading when I couldn't otherwise be shooting it isn't a problem. The best part, if there is a best part to a repetitious process, is that once you have things set up you can pretty much mindlessly meplat and point without the same degree of attention that other reloading steps require.
A little clarification on my previous post:
I go to all the extra effort only on my 338LM and even there I don't do it on all. I mainly began looking in to it and doing it when I compared both 250gr and 300gr Scenars vs their SMK counterparts and saw how ragged the SMKs appeared in comparison.
As to what I have observed in terms of an improvement it seemed to be pretty consistant across both 250 and 300gr SMKs.
My method was really quite simple. I pulled 100 SMKs from a box of 500 so I would be working with the same lot. I opened a new box of Lapua 338 brass so those were all from the same lot. I grabbed a new box od 100 primers so they were all from the same lot. Powder was from the same cannister.
50 of the SMKs got meplated and pointed, 50 did not. Charges were thrown using an RCBS ChargeMaster so there may be a bit of variation there within its degree of accuracy.
Bullets were seated and measured for both length and runnout. I tried to get two sets of ammunition put together that were as identical as I could, within reason, with the only difference being the extra work done to the SMKs prior to seating.
Alternating between the two batches it seemed to clearly show the there was an improvement as mentioned in my other post. Can I say it is worth it? Not sure but given that I do my reloading when I couldn't otherwise be shooting it isn't a problem. The best part, if there is a best part to a repetitious process, is that once you have things set up you can pretty much mindlessly meplat and point without the same degree of attention that other reloading steps require.
Re: MePlating
Fellow Hiders, I appreciate the more than enough input to help become more precise in my accuracy! I am currently testing what load works best in the brass I am using i.e. Winchester and LC. I am also in the testing phase of what grain bullet my barrel likes to find the "sweet" spot. Currently using 168 BTHP Sierra's. I purchased 1250 168 BTHP Noslers just to shoot(practice) on a regular basis due to being able to purchase them much cheaper than Berger and Sierra's. So yes I do spend much time shooting over reloading. I typically reload at night. Every little edge I can get, breathing technique, trigger control or in my reloading will add to better precision shooting!
Again, Much appreciated!!
Fellow Hiders, I appreciate the more than enough input to help become more precise in my accuracy! I am currently testing what load works best in the brass I am using i.e. Winchester and LC. I am also in the testing phase of what grain bullet my barrel likes to find the "sweet" spot. Currently using 168 BTHP Sierra's. I purchased 1250 168 BTHP Noslers just to shoot(practice) on a regular basis due to being able to purchase them much cheaper than Berger and Sierra's. So yes I do spend much time shooting over reloading. I typically reload at night. Every little edge I can get, breathing technique, trigger control or in my reloading will add to better precision shooting!
Again, Much appreciated!!
Re: MePlating
If you will be doing much shooting past 600 yds it would be a good idea to develope a load for 175's as well. Bought a load of Nosler 168's myself a couple of years ago on sale so they are used at the short lines.
OFG
If you will be doing much shooting past 600 yds it would be a good idea to develope a load for 175's as well. Bought a load of Nosler 168's myself a couple of years ago on sale so they are used at the short lines.
OFG
Re: MePlating
That's 1.5 down to .3
No one else on the range could get it to do better when I started.<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: oldfatguy</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Fred S,
Congrats on reducing your groups from .5 to .3 MOA.
Fact is the improvements in group size due to all the little things handloaders do are hard to quantify in the context of shooting; way too many variables.
Some can possibly separate the improvement directly attributed to meplate uniforming from the large number of factors that go into putting bullets downrange. The Huston warehouse project is one example, unlimited BR is another. Bipod loading, wind, trigger control, breathing, cheek weld.... for my skill level all the tiny improvements are lost in the wetware induced noise.
OFG </div></div>
That's 1.5 down to .3
No one else on the range could get it to do better when I started.<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: oldfatguy</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Fred S,
Congrats on reducing your groups from .5 to .3 MOA.
Fact is the improvements in group size due to all the little things handloaders do are hard to quantify in the context of shooting; way too many variables.
Some can possibly separate the improvement directly attributed to meplate uniforming from the large number of factors that go into putting bullets downrange. The Huston warehouse project is one example, unlimited BR is another. Bipod loading, wind, trigger control, breathing, cheek weld.... for my skill level all the tiny improvements are lost in the wetware induced noise.
OFG </div></div>
