Another confused load developer...

[Jackomason]

I really hate to be the guy that asks for someone to interpret groups and data but this is my first time trying an OCW, I've always ran ladder tests and I've always found it to be simple. This is also my first time loading for a magnum so I'm not sure how the OCW platform transfers seeing as it uses % of charge weight. I was jumping .5gr every load!?

I try to avoid mirage whenever I can but here in colorado it's been raining every night and boiling off in the mid to late morning. So I got my first run done before that started. Then I ran home and loaded up 2 loads (#6 and #7)on either side of the most hopeful group and got back out there but by then it was too late. So how much does mirage mess with your 100 yard groups?

I'll post the pictures, I find myself being a 3/8 shooter on the average day and 1/4 on a good day. Felt pretty average today.

Its worth noting that #6 and #7 were on either side of #1

7mm mag 24" barrel
162gr eldx
H1000
CCI 250 primers

 

[supercorndogs]

Maybe just quit wasting your time on this and go shoot a ladder. I don't know why you are trying to reinvent the wheel if you are already a 1/4 moa shooter.

 

[Jackomason]

Maybe just quit wasting your time on this and go shoot a ladder. I don't know why you are trying to reinvent the wheel if you are already a 1/4 moa shooter.

Your probably right, I decided to give this a go because my last time out my chrony was acting up and I figured I could get more out of shooting groups then a ladder. It worked pretty well today though.

 

[Precision Underground]

Maybe just quit wasting your time on this and go shoot a ladder. I don't know why you are trying to reinvent the wheel if you are already a 1/4 moa shooter.

OCW tests are about finding a charge range that shoots well. It doesn’t really have anything to do with How good of a shooter you are. Other than the better of a shooter you are the more you can trust the result.

 

[supercorndogs]

OCW tests are about finding a charge range that shoots well. It doesn’t really have anything to do with How good of a shooter you are. Other than the better of a shooter you are the more you can trust the result.

Well then sort him out sweetheart. Or are you just trying to troll? I am well aware of how OCW works and how to set it up. He has either not read or not comprehended how to do it. So tell me, why would he waste his time if ladders get him 1/4 moa results? I see about a half pound of powder and 50 bullets wasted there. I would have already ran my OCW and length with that, and a person who runs ladders would say I wasted 30 rounds.

 

[spife7980]

What chronograph?

 

[Precision Underground]

Well then sort him out sweetheart. Or are you just trying to troll? I am well aware of how OCW works and how to set it up. He has either not read or not comprehended how to do it. So tell me, why would he waste his time if ladders get him 1/4 moa results? I see about a half pound of powder and 50 bullets wasted there. I would have already ran my OCW and length with that, and a person who runs ladders would say I wasted 30 rounds.

There are exactly 23 holes in his paper, not sure how you counted 50. OCW is a much more thorough way to test loads compared to a ladder. Just because his first try at it wasn’t conclusive doesn’t mean he should abandon it. Hard to say for sure but those groups look to have a lot of shooter error in them, as opposed to load induced group spread. That is typical for someone’s first OCW just because it’s something new and people usually try too hard to make “groups”.

OP I would do the test again. Use pasted dots so they are all exactly the same. Put them as close together as possible. Be sure you are shooting it round robin style. Be sure to relax and just shoot without trying too hard. Don’t pay any attention to where the bullets are printing, make each shot a single event rather than thinking of the overall test and what kind of groups are popping up. Do this and your OCW test will usually show a result that will be very easy to read. All of this is assuming that you are a good group shooter as you said. You said 1/4 MOA which is very hard to do for a rifle and a shooter. I’m not doubting you just make sure you are honest with yourself on what you average group is because an OCW Test IS a waste of time if it’s full of shooter error. Shooter error OCW tests usually look very random and hard to read. Ones without much shooter error usually show a clear pattern of good groups that open up and then tighten back up.

 

[Jackomason]

There are exactly 23 holes in his paper, not sure how you counted 50. OCW is a much more thorough way to test loads compared to a ladder. Just because his first try at it wasn’t conclusive doesn’t mean he should abandon it. Hard to say for sure but those groups look to have a lot of shooter error in them, as opposed to load induced group spread. That is typical for someone’s first OCW just because it’s something new and people usually try too hard to make “groups”.

OP I would do the test again. Use pasted dots so they are all exactly the same. Put them as close together as possible. Be sure you are shooting it round robin style. Be sure to relax and just shoot without trying too hard. Don’t pay any attention to where the bullets are printing, make each shot a single event rather than thinking of the overall test and what kind of groups are popping up. Do this and your OCW test will usually show a result that will be very easy to read. All of this is assuming that you are a good group shooter as you said. You said 1/4 MOA which is very hard to do for a rifle and a shooter. I’m not doubting you just make sure you are honest with yourself on what you average group is because an OCW Test IS a waste of time if it’s full of shooter error. Shooter error OCW tests usually look very random and hard to read. Ones without much shooter error usually show a clear pattern of good groups that open up and then tighten back up.

Thanks for an actual reply and not more trolling. To be clear I'm not claiming to be a 1/4 moa shooter day in and day out, the dots I made approx 3/8" and all but one shoot felt good. I did do round Robin and followed the OCW test as best I could. I dont believe there were any errors in my loading or how it was conducted.

It's possible that my errors are in there and as I said mirage was awful for groups #6 and #7 and the shape of the group makes me wonder if that played a part. Most of the groups are 1" plus and I know I was shooting better than that. I dont think I had any flinch, I shot from the prone off a bipod. I appreciate it but I dont think my error zone is that big. I'm going to go over the rifle again to make sure nothing moved.

 

[Jackomason]

What chronograph?

The chrony is a weak link and I take its data with a grain of salt. It's a chrony F1, I got it a few years ago and since getting married and having a baby I've never been able to justify buying a better one.

 

[Precision Underground]

Thanks for an actual reply and not more trolling. To be clear I'm not claiming to be a 1/4 moa shooter day in and day out, the dots I made approx 3/8" and all but one shoot felt good. I did do round Robin and followed the OCW test as best I could. I dont believe there were any errors in my loading or how it was conducted.

It's possible that my errors are in there and as I said mirage was awful for groups #6 and #7 and the shape of the group makes me wonder if that played a part. Most of the groups are 1" plus and I know I was shooting better than that. I dont think I had any flinch, I shot from the prone off a bipod. I appreciate it but I dont think my error zone is that big. I'm going to go over the rifle again to make sure nothing moved.

What kind of rifle/barrel are we talking about?

 

[Jackomason]

Bergara B14 ridge 7mm mag 24" barrel, bushnell ET 6-24 using TPS aluminum rings and base.

The barrel would be comparable to a shilen or so they say. It's just a button rifled barrel. I know some shilens are known to walk but I've never seen how much. This barrel ends at a .700 so it's not too beefy.

 

[Devildog]

In the past I had some struggles with load development and I was trying to figure out the OCW development process. After wasting a lot of time and ammo I reach out to Dan Newberry and for a small fee like $35 he was a wealth of information and he helped me dial in some great shooting loads.

Something that I wouldnt have tried but through his advice was on my 300 WSM I use large rifle primers instead of magnum primers. Some may argue that choice but it’s working well for me.

There’s a lot of good shooters and reloaders here on the hide the struggle is figuring out who really knows what there doing and who doesn’t. My advice would be don’t get caught up in all who know bests and contact Dan. I promise you’ll save money, time and frustration. Good luck http://optimalchargeweight.embarqspace.com/ocw-consulting/4568639027

 

[padom]

Bergara B14 ridge 7mm mag 24" barrel, bushnell ET 6-24 using TPS aluminum rings and base.

The barrel would be comparable to a shilen or so they say. It's just a button rifled barrel. I know some shilens are known to walk but I've never seen how much. This barrel ends at a .700 so it's not too beefy.

Your problem lies in looking at group sizes. If you read Dan Newberry's OCW you will understood OCW is not about finding the smallest group (at least in the first round of testing). Your looking for charge weights with similar POI. You have pretty consistent POI's at 5:30-6:00. When I get a really wide node during my OCW test I then use pressure signs and chrono data to help me pick my Optimal Charge Weight. Once you have done that you want to load up 5rd each, all with your chosen charge weight and do seating depth testing. Seat in 0.005" increments moving away from the lands. 99% of the time you will find one seating depth that stands out from the rest that shrinks the group right up. I then do a load confirmation shooting 5 shot group at 300yd and 500yd.

 

[Jackomason]

Your

Your problem lies in looking at group sizes. If you read Dan Newberry's OCW you will understood OCW is not about finding the smallest group (at least in the first round of testing). Your looking for charge weights with similar POI. You have pretty consistent POI's at 5:30-6:00. When I get a really wide node during my OCW test I then use pressure signs and chrono data to help me pick my Optimal Charge Weight. Once you have done that you want to load up 5rd each, all with your chosen charge weight and do seating depth testing. Seat in 0.005" increments moving away from the lands. 99% of the time you will find one seating depth that stands out from the rest that shrinks the group right up. I then do a load confirmation shooting 5 shot group at 300yd and 500yd.

Totally right, I should have gone back and read it again. I read it while loading and then forgot about the POI stuff. I'll have to measure tonight, I guess I should try to save for a magneto speed. I do know that when it works it gets me started on my DOPE but I dont depend on it all that much for load development other than if I'm near my goal MV. Thanks again, I'll re read and evaluate my groups later!

 

[Deleted member 113831]

I really hate to be the guy that asks for someone to interpret groups and data but this is my first time trying an OCW, I've always ran ladder tests and I've always found it to be simple. This is also my first time loading for a magnum so I'm not sure how the OCW platform transfers seeing as it uses % of charge weight. I was jumping .5gr every load!?

I try to avoid mirage whenever I can but here in colorado it's been raining every night and boiling off in the mid to late morning. So I got my first run done before that started. Then I ran home and loaded up 2 loads (#6 and #7)on either side of the most hopeful group and got back out there but by then it was too late. So how much does mirage mess with your 100 yard groups?

I'll post the pictures, I find myself being a 3/8 shooter on the average day and 1/4 on a good day. Felt pretty average today.

Its worth noting that #6 and #7 were on either side of #1

7mm mag 24" barrel
162gr eldx
H1000
CCI 250 primers

Putting the loads in order of charge, look at the POI and vertical spread of #6, #1, #7, #2. You have the same POI, you have a very small vertical spread. Even #3 has the same POI but the vertical is beginning to open up. You can see that at #4 and #5 there is a major POI shift and vertical opens up considerably.

I would go with 68.5 grains for a nice wide node and play with seating depth to tighten it up.

 

[Jackomason]

al

Putting the loads in order of charge, look at the POI and vertical spread of #6, #1, #7, #2. You have the same POI, you have a very small vertical spread. Even #3 has the same POI but the vertical is beginning to open up. You can see that at #4 and #5 there is a major POI shift and vertical opens up considerably.

I would go with 68.5 grains for a nice wide node and play with seating depth to tighten it up.

Yeah, you're right. #1 #2 & #3 are all 1 3/8" while #6 and #7 are 1 3/4". It seems likely that leaving and coming back I very well could have changed my form and had the groups drop 3/8".

I feel good about the pressure of those loads so I think I'll give that a go.

 

[supercorndogs]

I don't think 1 and 2 to have the same POI. 2 and 3 maybe. I would run a length test there. I like to run my OCW at .020 then do a length test at .010, .030, .040, .060.

I was not trying to troll you. I just see OCW as a method for people who are constrained to a 100 yard range. I live 5 minutes from a 100 yard range. I have to drive half an hour to where I shoot 400-1000y. I shoot OCW's because I can run to range, get my data run home load my length test and back to the range for chrono testing in less time. I feel like OCW brings up a lot more questions than ladder tests do. There is a certain amount of guess on POI, and I would be lying if I said I hadn't chased a probable scatter node thinking I was in the right place. Just food for thought. Sorry, I don't mean to try and discourage you from learning a new method.

 

[Jackomason]

Definatly worth considering , thanks. I understand dealing with people gets annoying especially when the answer is clear. But I did come here to learn and being new to OCW there was definatly things I missed/forgot when reading through the instructions.

I ran a ladder with this rifle using H4831 hoping that it would work cause I have a lot. The pressure was too high and the velocities were hardly worth the cost of the bullets. I was at .020" so I backed it off to .030" for this test. Hind sight this probably wasn't the best move. I may test .020 but wouldn't it be a bit risky doing much closer? Technically load development should start touching and move out but I never plan to touch or jam.

As of now my plan is to test 68.5, it does make sense to start at .010 and work out then test either side of that node. Thanks again and no hard feelings.

 

[Deleted member 113831]

I don't think 1 and 2 to have the same POI. 2 and 3 maybe. .

If you look at the groups in the order I mentioned #6, #1,#7,#2, this is the sequential order of the charges. You will notice the actual size of the groups in the horozontal and you will also notice that #1 is the only one slightly to the right.

But if you consider the width of the other groups before and behind it, it is clear that it is an anomaly. So it is likely that those three rounds simply stacked up on that one side of the possible dispersion. You have to look at the whole picture if you are going to use this method.

 

[supercorndogs]

Definatly worth considering , thanks. I understand dealing with people gets annoying especially when the answer is clear. But I did come here to learn and being new to OCW there was definatly things I missed/forgot when reading through the instructions.

I ran a ladder with this rifle using H4831 hoping that it would work cause I have a lot. The pressure was too high and the velocities were hardly worth the cost of the bullets. I was at .020" so I backed it off to .030" for this test. Hind sight this probably wasn't the best move. I may test .020 but wouldn't it be a bit risky doing much closer? Technically load development should start touching and move out but I never plan to touch or jam.

As of now my plan is to test 68.5, it does make sense to start at .010 and work out then test either side of that node. Thanks again and no hard feelings.

I am very much the same, as in I don't like to get close or touch lands ever. Sometimes we get all obsessed with getting close but my factory 300wm shot great with a jump in in the .2 range. I could not touch the lands with 208 a max and keep it in the case. I have been pleasantly surprised following POI and ignoring the groups, then testing groups with length.

Skookum demonstrated what I was saying about reading POI. Here is what I see, the most confusing OCW target ever,LOL just kidding. 6,1,7 in order the POI is moving up and down, 2,3, same, 4 down, 5 moving back up again, and will probably stable out a little higher again at the next node. I would start at 69.

These are a lot easier to read on grid shot in order.

 

[Precision Underground]

The POI in that target is all over the place. Yes there are a few at 5:30-6 but there is a ton of randomness gong on. It is correct that you are not looking for the smallest group in an OCW. What I look for is the group of groups. Meaning an in-line set of good groups with roughly the same poi. IMO seating depth is not going to bring those bullets in 1”. Though I don’t shoot depth sensitive bullets. Every OCW I have ever shot (and felt good about the shooting) showed a clear group of decent/good groups that open up and then close back up as the charge increases. Then i choose the charge in the middle of the good groups. IMO an OCW Test that is not easy to read is an invalid test. Or simply a test that shows the barrel, powder, bullet combo just won’t shoot.

 

[Precision Underground]

To test and see if it is your shooting or the rifle or something other than the charges, load up a set of all the same charge and shoot them round robin the same as you would for a test. My guess is you are going to see roughly the same randomness.

 

[Jackomason]

To test and see if it is your shooting or the rifle or something other than the charges, load up a set of all the same charge and shoot them round robin the same as you would for a test. My guess is you are going to see roughly the same randomness.

Not saying it's not possible but I have other guns that shoot great. I dont see why this would be any different. I do have a brake on it and it really doesn't kick at all. I'll see what happens with seating depth then if I dont get anywhere I'm going to run a ladder.

 

[____________]

Clearly 4 and 5 are tightening up (ES). Explore those.

 

[supercorndogs]

Not saying it's not possible but I have other guns that shoot great. I dont see why this would be any different. I do have a brake on it and it really doesn't kick at all. I'll see what happens with seating depth then if I dont get anywhere I'm going to run a ladder.

Rifle problems are one more thing that could be happening here. What is it? POI moving around like that can be from bedding.

 

[nexusfire]

I dicked around with OCW until I saw the light with doing a ladder test. I go 0.015 off the lands and find a charge that shoots good. I can typically do this with less than 30 rounds. I found that shooting groups at 100 yards does not necessarily translate to accuracy at distance.

 

[Jackomason]

I dicked around with OCW until I saw the light with doing a ladder test. I go 0.015 off the lands and find a charge that shoots good. I can typically do this with less than 30 rounds. I found that shooting groups at 100 yards does not necessarily translate to accuracy at distance.

The more opinions I'm hearing of this test is that it's really not worth it for me. Let alone my test specifically. I have the range to shoot a ladder but the mirage is really killing me. I can't tell what order my shots are landing in and my chronograph isn't too trustworthy. I may just go get a magneto speed, I dont know how that effects POI/harmonics but I'm sure I could do some searching for that answer.

I dont think there is a way for me to post video or else I'd post the one I took out of curiosity to see how the brake would work and in that case I'm sure you could find some flaws! Haha

Thanks again guys, I will say that I'm just as lost as when I started and am now considering shooting a ladder and assume they land in order. Unless someone wants to come stand by the target for me?

 

[spife7980]

Magneatospeed will throw your ladder off.

Get a 10 pack of sharpies that come in all different colors and mark the whole bullet after it’s seated, you can see the color on paper and tell by that which round was which without walking down range each time.

Myself, I like an ocw just fine. I use ladders to tell me where I need to be looking generally and then I run an ocw off that to save some searching into scatter nodes. I’ve also taken to shooting a ladder but multiples of each charge and seeing how the groups ladder instead of individual shots.

There are a 100 different ways to find a load and all of them have their merits and detractors. Keep it up.

 

[nexusfire]

Magneatospeed will throw your ladder off.

Get a 10 pack of sharpies that come in all different colors and mark the whole bullet after it’s seated, you can see the color on paper and tell by that which round was which without walking down range each time.

Myself, I like an ocw just fine. I use ladders to tell me where I need to be looking generally and then I run an ocw off that to save some searching into scatter nodes. I’ve also taken to shooting a ladder but multiples of each charge and seeing how the groups ladder instead of individual shots.

There are a 100 different ways to find a load and all of them have their merits and detractors. Keep it up.

I do a .2gr ladder, 3 shots of each charge. I do the sharpie method also.

 

[nexusfire]

another problem i have with OCW is the large sample size used to produce results. As shooter we don't like to talk about our own abilities. Being able to squeeze off 40 or 50 perfect shots is impossible.

 

[Precision Underground]

another problem i have with OCW is the large sample size used to produce results. As shooter we don't like to talk about our own abilities. Being able to squeeze off 40 or 50 perfect shots is impossible.

Perfect is usually impossible in anything, especially precision shooting. 40-50 good enough trigger pulls to test loads is very possible. Even so, any load test is dependent on ones shooting abilities. If you are not confident in your shooting you will chase your tail forever load testing. You will keep chasing the load and not realize it's not the load it is YOU. If you are a good shooter it is pretty easy to tell if the trigger you just pulled was a good one or a bad one. People who are not experienced/good shooters can't tell the difference. I know I couldn't until I put in enough time to be deliberate and stay present all of the way through the shot. I would load test and rifle test and always blame bad shooting on equipment. I had no idea I was not a good shooter. I could not imagine how what I was doing was not good enough to put the shots where I wanted them to go. It was basically me trying to hold the rifle as steady as possible while trying hard to slowly pull the trigger without moving the rifle and then a total blackout for a split second as the shot finally broke... and then wake up from the split second blackout to refocus on the target to see where it went. From what I knew the rifle stayed on target up until the shot broke. Well it didn't because I sucked at shooting and that millisecond blackout is so fast you don't even know it is happening and that is where everything goes to shit. Once you are NOT blacking out you realize you WERE blacking out and your shooting gets a lot, lot better. When it happened to me it was literally like a light switch going off. Now I don't blink when I shoot and I always thought that was impossible.
It's a matter of-
Keeping your focus on the task which is hitting the target with the bullet. The task is NOT holding the reticle on the target and squeezing the trigger.
Being prepared for the sound/recoil by knowing really well what it feels and sounds like.
DELIBERATELY pulling the trigger to make the shot happen so you know when it is going to happen. You do this with your focus still on driving the bullet into the target, not on how to squeeze the trigger. It is no different than pressing your gas pedal when driving. You arent thinking about the gas pedal or how to push it you are focused on where you want the vehicle to go and performing tasks to make that happen.
The whole "just squeeze and let the rifle surprise you" is the worst shooting advice ever. I think people get too careful with their trigger pull. You can pull the trigger with some authority if you do it correctly.
Thats how I do it anyway, lol.

 

[supercorndogs]

another problem i have with OCW is the large sample size used to produce results. As shooter we don't like to talk about our own abilities. Being able to squeeze off 40 or 50 perfect shots is impossible.

It really tends to be a lot easier to see with a very accurate rifle. And on a grid with a very precise aim point. I am not trying to put OCW down, I have never shot a ladder for load development. I shoot groups at 300 and 600 to confirm.

 

[Jackomason]

Thought I'd give an update.

I went with the 68.5gr load and played with seating depth. I chose this because it was the closest option that matched the original intent of the OCW test by choosing similar POI rather than group size/shape.

I ran a seating depth test with 5 shots each waiting 15 minutes between strings and got some interesting results. The major things I learned were:

1. Group size and shape can be changed radically by seating depth

2. Thinner contours heat up fast. This isn't a pencil barrel but magnums sure do produce heat.

3. Snipers hide has some great guys that are down to earth and know their stuff.. find them and learn all you can. It's better to learn than to think your teaching!

With this in mind here are my results. After the seating depth test I moved to shooting 3 round groups and waiting 20 minutes to cool. I've really gotta swallow my pride because I've never been a big 3 shot group guy.

The 400 yard group measures 2 1/4" tall and nearly 4" wide. I'm assuming that my wind call wasn't perfect for all 3 shots but I'm happy with that group. Would you be?

I confirmed on steel at 400 and 565 and got comparable results. Wind was 5-6 mph with highs of 8 and lows of 4.

 

[Deleted member 113831]

The 400 yard group measures 2 1/4" tall and nearly 4" wide. I'm assuming that my wind call wasn't perfect for all 3 shots but I'm happy with that group. Would you be?

I confirmed on steel at 400 and 565 and got comparable results. Wind was 5-6 mph with highs of 8 and lows of 4.

You miscounted, that group is just less than 3 inches wide. That will do nicely, well done!

 

[Jackomason]

Huh, I must have been pretty tired cause I did totally miss that. Good stuff! Thanks again all.

 

[Precision Underground]

Thought I'd give an update.

I went with the 68.5gr load and played with seating depth. I chose this because it was the closest option that matched the original intent of the OCW test by choosing similar POI rather than group size/shape.

I ran a seating depth test with 5 shots each waiting 15 minutes between strings and got some interesting results. The major things I learned were:

1. Group size and shape can be changed radically by seating depth

2. Thinner contours heat up fast. This isn't a pencil barrel but magnums sure do produce heat.

3. Snipers hide has some great guys that are down to earth and know their stuff.. find them and learn all you can. It's better to learn than to think your teaching!

With this in mind here are my results. After the seating depth test I moved to shooting 3 round groups and waiting 20 minutes to cool. I've really gotta swallow my pride because I've never been a big 3 shot group guy.

The 400 yard group measures 2 1/4" tall and nearly 4" wide. I'm assuming that my wind call wasn't perfect for all 3 shots but I'm happy with that group. Would you be?

I confirmed on steel at 400 and 565 and got comparable results. Wind was 5-6 mph with highs of 8 and lows of 4.

What does the 5 shot depth target look like?

 

[Jackomason]

What does the 5 shot depth target look like?

Its the one I posted. Its 3 stacked horizontally with two flyers.

 

[nexusfire]

I would not be happy with that much vetitcal

 

[Deleted member 113831]

I would not be happy with that much vetitcal

Which target has too much vertical for a hunting rifle?

 

[Precision Underground]

Its the one I posted. Its 3 stacked horizontally with two flyers.

I meant the whole test with different depths. What did the groups all look like?

 

[nexusfire]

Which target has too much vertical for a hunting rifle?

If you are bothering to hand load you might as well make it as accurate as you can. I want my hunting rifles to be as accurate as any of my other rifles that I am hand loading for. The whole idea is to humanely take game.

 

[Deleted member 113831]

If you are bothering to hand load you might as well make it as accurate as you can. I want my hunting rifles to be as accurate as any of my other rifles that I am hand loading for. The whole idea is to humanely take game.

The 100 yard target was 4 in a straight line. The one shot opened it up to .75 moa on the vertical. The 400 yard target was .5 moa tall and .75 moa wide. Your sporter weight rifles shoot better than that?

 

[Jackomason]

Yeah, I'm happy with it. The season I ended up drawing for elk puts me at a time where they should be much lower and i have a hard time imagining a shot past 300 yards. But I would feel comfortable with that group size for pretty much anything 700 and in. I didn't drop a shot all day on a 33% ipsc 7.5" wide so I shouldn't have a problem on a 16" kill zone.
I understand everyone's ethics are different and the goal of making the cleanest kill possible is honorable but I really don't think it would be a heinous crime to shoot an animal with this load. Not even close.

 

[nexusfire]

The 100 yard target was 4 in a straight line. The one shot opened it up to .75 moa on the vertical. The 400 yard target was .5 moa tall and .75 moa wide. Your sporter weight rifles shoot better than that?

Like I said Champ, why bother reloading if you are not going to squeeze all the accuracy you can out of it, sporter rifle or not. With that kind of accuracy I would just buy some good quality factory ammo.

 

[supercorndogs]

Yep, that will do for an elk hinting trip. Best luck on your hunting trip. I would be interested to see if it tightened up between 69-70g.

 

[Deleted member 113831]

Like I said Champ, why bother reloading if you are not going to squeeze all the accuracy you can out of it, sporter rifle or not. With that kind of accuracy I would just buy some good quality factory ammo.

OK