- Sep 11, 2018
- 240
- 45
- 47
Hey everyone, new to this site, obviously first post.... i appreciate your patience with me on a very beat to death subject. What grain weight would you choose from this test?
- Thread starter KOPFJÄGER13
- Start date
- Sep 11, 2018
- 240
- 45
- 47
Sorry, forgot to state that its my opinion 44.9 would be the best choice....
I’m not seeing a pic?
- Sep 11, 2018
- 240
- 45
- 47
What’s the rifle/barrel?
- Sep 11, 2018
- 240
- 45
- 47
Rem 700 5Rmilspec.... 308... round is 168gr SMK
You’re on the right track, I would probably take 44.8 and dona seating depth now.
- Sep 11, 2018
- 240
- 45
- 47
The seating depth right now is set to mag lengh of 2.855".....that put that particular rifle at .065" jump.....
I would be going 44.6 to stay away from the low ones at 45.1 and 45.3.
44.3 looks like its got a tight group with little vertical deviation. Did you get velocities for these loads as well? I like to compare grouping with velocity to add to the information i am looking at when selecting a load.
I dont know where youre at in your process for this round but i like to load my tighest groups and the charges around them to confirm what past results.
I would load every 1/10th grain from 44.2 too 45.0; 3 round groups and track velocities before i make a selection on a charge.
I dont know where youre at in your process for this round but i like to load my tighest groups and the charges around them to confirm what past results.
I would load every 1/10th grain from 44.2 too 45.0; 3 round groups and track velocities before i make a selection on a charge.
The whole point of OCW is to find a wide range of charges that shoot alike and well, not to find a magic charge down to the tenth of a grain. Breaking a 1 grain range into tenths to test again is tedious and not necessary IMO.
You can still try more jump. I would do what spife said. 44.8 and run length testing.
I agree with Spife with 44.8.
My understanding, aligned to the others, is that Dan Newberry’s OCW was intended to give you a charge that was less sensitive to temp, powder weight etc. According to the OCW you are looking for exactly is in the picture. 44.8 would be my choice. Depending on what your shooting purpose is either call it good or work on seeking depth.
- Sep 11, 2018
- 240
- 45
- 47
Thanks guys, i just wanred to make sure my head was in the right place.... 44.8-9 is what i was thinking too....
- Sep 11, 2018
- 240
- 45
- 47
No i didnt get velocities, i usually find "that load" and then zero the scope to it & get velocity, SD & ES in order to get a decent start to a dope card......
Seems to me there is a node between 44.7 and 44.9. As @spife7980 said make a 44.8 load and play with the seating deph.
IMO a “node” between 3/10 of a charge weight is not a node. On a 40+ grain load I am looking for a node that is nearly a grain wide. I think he has that between 44.3 and 45.1. I would not want to settle at 44.8, only 3/10 under 45.1.
- Sep 11, 2018
- 240
- 45
- 47
Are you saying 44.7 as "the load" youd work with? I was leaning toward 44.9 to maybe grab a few fps...but i dont want to cheat myself chasing velocity...
The idea is to get in the middle of the node so a little more or a little less pressure doesn't push you out of it.
- Sep 11, 2018
- 240
- 45
- 47
.....and thats the wsy i understood it, 44.7-44.9 seems to be the middle of the node.... i just wanted everyones opinion, this was very tight as far as deviation, it seems as though the rifle will be relatively forgiving....
No 44.7-44.9 is the node. 44.8 is in the middle. Or thats the hypothesis we gained from the target.
- Sep 11, 2018
- 240
- 45
- 47
Thanks for taking a look at it with me everyone, i appreciate it, and will take the time to work with 44.8.......
Only thing you can do now is go further away from the lands. In that case I would try .010 increments.
- Sep 11, 2018
- 240
- 45
- 47
Im at .065" now, im not use to seating further and getting better groups.... seems like its always been the case for me to seat between .045 & .010..... but ill give anything a shot to see if i can improve....
