Is Positive Compensation that Accounts for Greater Precision than ES Would Predict, a Myth?

thestoicmarcusaurelius

The Real Tiger King
Supporter
Full Member
Minuteman
Jun 15, 2020
848
1,184
Alabama Slammer
Is positive compensation that accounts for greater precision than ES would predict, a myth?

Continuation from "Are Velocity Flat Spots a Myth" Thread.
 

XLR308

Old Salt
Full Member
Minuteman
  • Mar 22, 2018
    3,803
    3,905
    Grand Junction, Colorado
    I have allways used the 10 shot ladder and look for flat spots and it has worked exceptionally well for me for a couple decades but who gives a fuck.
    I use high quality brass for that type of testing and neck turn to clean up and normalize neck thickness as well as a mandrell run through the necks for consistent tention but many cant wrap thier heads around shit that makes sense good luck with this one. 🤣🤣
     

    XLR308

    Old Salt
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Mar 22, 2018
    3,803
    3,905
    Grand Junction, Colorado
    I must be the only tard that ladder tests for pc and then settles on that load because my scope’s internal travel isn’t enough to get to 1k.
    Not a tard at all, i let the rifle tell me were its happy with the bullet powder combo and expand from there.
    My method works for me and usually find a combo witinn about 20 rounds but if it takes others 80-100 or more rounds i dont give a shit if they cant find tnier own ass with a self drawn map. 🤣🤣
     

    Newbie2020

    Mmmyeah...whatever
    Supporter
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Jan 10, 2020
    1,495
    1,215
    Amarillo
    @thestoicmarcusaurelius i like the attempt to draw out some wisdom or truth like you did in the flat spots thread but I’m dubious we’ll get there this time. Some of the truly brilliant ballisticians like Bryan Litz who are serious data hounds can neither confirm nor deny the existence.
     

    djarecke

    Full Member
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Mar 9, 2013
    550
    251
    I’ll tell you what: no matter which side of this argument you’re on, you better have a 100 round zero and a 2000 round data set to back up your opinion.

    And people still won’t believe you or change their mind about anything.
     

    Ledzep

    Chancellor
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Jun 9, 2009
    3,301
    2,910
    NE
    I bet you could make a bedding block that has a tunable mechanical "switch" in it. Basically the action rides on rails or maybe a cam system, and you zero it out for the average MV impulse, but can adjust springs and/or pre-load such that shots with higher than average velocity tip the barrel down, and lower than average velocity tip it up. The severity of which is how you tune for various ranges.
     

    thestoicmarcusaurelius

    The Real Tiger King
    Supporter
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Jun 15, 2020
    848
    1,184
    Alabama Slammer
    @thestoicmarcusaurelius i like the attempt to draw out some wisdom or truth like you did in the flat spots thread but I’m dubious we’ll get there this time. Some of the truly brilliant ballisticians like Bryan Litz who are serious data hounds can neither confirm nor deny the existence.

    i doubt it too

    let's get back to mil vs moa threads and and which chinese optic is just as good as a nightforce for under $500 threads

    apparently it has ruffled some feathers of the "i aim a couple inches above shoulder with my core-lokts and am dead on out to 1000" crowd
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Baron23

    XLR308

    Old Salt
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Mar 22, 2018
    3,803
    3,905
    Grand Junction, Colorado
    i doubt it too

    let's get back to mil vs moa threads and and which chinese optic is just as good as a nightforce for under $500 threads

    apparently it has ruffled some feathers of the "i aim a couple inches above shoulder with my core-lokts and am dead on out to 1000" crowd
    I dont give a rats ass what super boy mod doesnt agree with me my 10 shot method has worked for decades and thats what i will continue to use.
    Suck it fan boys
     

    thestoicmarcusaurelius

    The Real Tiger King
    Supporter
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Jun 15, 2020
    848
    1,184
    Alabama Slammer
    I dont give a rats ass what super boy mod doesnt agree with me my 10 shot method has worked for decades and thats what i will continue to use.
    Suck it fan boys

    Just an FYI, that wasn't aimed at you. It was squarely aimed at this thread https://www.snipershide.com/shooting/threads/overcomplicating-things.7081710/



    You said what your method is (which is exactly what the forum is about, imo), which is actually more complicated than my method lol which was "zero" load development and it shoots just fine with zero "testing" or "ladders" or anything else but I don't go around making fun of people that feel like they need to do those things.
     

    Milo 2.5

    The Dalai Lama of the Reload
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Aug 7, 2014
    2,745
    1,940
    Gillette, WY
    I’ll tell you what: no matter which side of this argument you’re on, you better have a 100 round zero and a 2000 round data set to back up your opinion.

    And people still won’t believe you or change their mind about anything.
    I must ask, and not you in particular. Why are you`, or What do you have to gain by changing minds if the question was not asked?
     

    XLR308

    Old Salt
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Mar 22, 2018
    3,803
    3,905
    Grand Junction, Colorado
    Just an FYI, that wasn't aimed at you. It was squarely aimed at this thread https://www.snipershide.com/shooting/threads/overcomplicating-things.7081710/



    You said what your method is (which is exactly what the forum is about, imo), which is actually more complicated than my method lol which was "zero" load development and it shoots just fine with zero "testing" or "ladders" or anything else but I don't go around making fun of people that feel like they need to do those things.
    Not taken that way at all brother i was just being the to the point asshole i have allways been.🤣🤣
     

    Dthomas3523

    Hall Monitor
    Staff member
    Moderator
    Supporter
    Commercial Supporter
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Jan 31, 2018
    10,638
    15,215
    South Texas
    I dont give a rats ass what super boy mod doesnt agree with me my 10 shot method has worked for decades and thats what i will continue to use.
    Suck it fan boys

    It works in spite of the 10 shot. Not because of it.

    Big difference.

    You’re literally spinning a 10 slot wheel and shooting what it lands on.

    Take those same 10 charges, write them on pieces of paper and pull one out of a hat.

    It will work exactly the same as the flat spot load.
     

    XLR308

    Old Salt
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Mar 22, 2018
    3,803
    3,905
    Grand Junction, Colorado
    It works in spite of the 10 shot. Not because of it.

    Big difference.

    You’re literally spinning a 10 slot wheel and shooting what it lands on.

    Take those same 10 charges, write them on pieces of paper and pull one out of a hat.

    It will work exactly the same as the flat spot load.
    So weight sorted as well as internal volume sorted cases from the same lot that have had the necks turned for uniformity and run through a mandrell are not uniform enough to take a statistical standard from arent good enough then you have no standing at all to be comenting on anything reloading related as you dont understand anything reloading related and should just sshut your mouth
    I know you are a shooter but dont asume you know eveything about shooting.

    Edit: Was mainly just poking the hornets nest @Dthomas3523 but you certainly didnt fall for it. 😁
     
    Last edited:

    Ledzep

    Chancellor
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Jun 9, 2009
    3,301
    2,910
    NE
    Doing all of that brass prep does not wrangle in the dispersion enough to make it "statistics proof".

    Virgin brass + thrown charges is within 2% of the mean radius and 2.5fps on SD of weight and volume sorted, annealed, neck turned, trimmed, flex honed, graphites cases with charges weighed to the .02gr. from what I've seen before, I'd guess most of that difference is the result of charge weight consistency, not the brass prep.

    The bullet moving in the first microseconds after the primer goes off creates volume changes that make a couple grains worth of brass volume negligible.
     

    XLR308

    Old Salt
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Mar 22, 2018
    3,803
    3,905
    Grand Junction, Colorado
    Doing all of that brass prep does not wrangle in the dispersion enough to make it "statistics proof".

    Virgin brass + thrown charges is within 2% of the mean radius and 2.5fps on SD of weight and volume sorted, annealed, neck turned, trimmed, flex honed, graphites cases with charges weighed to the .02gr. from what I've seen before, I'd guess most of that difference is the result of charge weight consistency, not the brass prep.

    The bullet moving in the first microseconds after the primer goes off creates volume changes that make a couple grains worth of brass volume negligible.
    It has worked for me enough that i dont give two shits what keyboard cammandos say that i keep doing it.
     

    Newbie2020

    Mmmyeah...whatever
    Supporter
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Jan 10, 2020
    1,495
    1,215
    Amarillo
    It’s nothing new. Years ago Col Cooper called it “PII”; Preoccupation with Inconsequential Increments.

    On one hand, it is how world class achievements occur and higher standards are normalized. On the other hand, it’s pretty meaningless for the vast majority in whatever discipline it’s applied. Arguing about how many Angels can dance on the head of a pin…
    I stole this line from the other thread....
     

    Newbie2020

    Mmmyeah...whatever
    Supporter
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Jan 10, 2020
    1,495
    1,215
    Amarillo
    The other thing that comes to my newbie mind is that not all opinions are equal: mine is worthless; @Ledzep and @phlegethon @Dthomas3523 Bryan Litz Cal Zant are worth a lot; most of the rest fall somewhere in between.

    They’re both intelligent and data driven.

    Just doing something that works for a guy is good for that guy, but it doesn’t really advance the conversation.
     

    BLKWLFK9

    Just F'n Send It..
    Supporter
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Feb 13, 2017
    2,747
    4,394
    People have had really good hand crafted ammo for decades and have all done it different ways. .5 moa is .5 moa. I can give you 4 sets of ammo, all performing the same but all got to that point in different ways and I would challenge anyone to tell me how I landed on each load in development. Which method did I use for each group set? There isn't reason to say which is wrong and which is right if they are equally accurate/consistent. Just don't go around saying your way is the only way to develop quality ammo bc there are 100 dudes that will disagree with you and can prove to u that their method also produces equally good ammo. In K9 training, the only thing 2 trainers can agree on is that the 3rd guy is doing it wrong. I can and have trained a focused heel, bite targeting, scent detection, and a down/stay multiple different ways on multiple different dogs. Guess what, they all learned the tasks and all executed them to my liking. Load development isn't different. The biggest deciding factor in methods imo would be safety. Thats it.
     

    phlegethon

    Supporter
    Supporter
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Nov 4, 2018
    1,469
    1,326
    Just don't go around saying your way is the only way to develop quality ammo bc there are 100 dudes that will disagree with you and can prove to u that their method also produces equally good ammo. In K9 training, the only thing 2 trainers can agree on is that the 3rd guy is doing it wrong.
    That much disagreement is almost always a sign of an undeveloped field, where no one really understands what they are doing. There are not hundreds of different opinions about what optical formulas to use when developing riflescopes, or what equations to use in rocket design. Even in medicine, where the systems are far more complex and harder to study, there is much more consensus on how to develop and evaluate a treatment. So whatever load development theories you like, they have a high probability of being bullshit.
     

    Newbie2020

    Mmmyeah...whatever
    Supporter
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Jan 10, 2020
    1,495
    1,215
    Amarillo
    Or to put it a different way, no one is saying, if you’re making sub half moa ammo, your practices don’t work or aren’t effective, they’re asking have you ever compared (using robust sample size) your current effective method to an alternative method and controlled ancillary variables? It’s fine for you to keep doing what has always worked, but if you’ve never tried something different, you don’t have an argument.

    People like @Dthomas3523 and Bryan Litz (who recently won 1st in the Nightforce ELR match) have evaluated the value of doing things like chamfering primer pockets or weighing brass, and even trimming necks on every case, etc. and have determined that if you do the important things (consistent powder drop, consistent neck diameter, good components, FL sizing) well and consistently, you can build precise ammo that’s “good enough”, and eliminate many time consuming practices.
     

    sirhrmechanic

    Command Sgt. Major
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Meh, I just throw in some random surplus powder and rely on these...


    Sirhr

    PS: For those with good Google-fu... there is a lot of good info from the USA and Ordnance Dept. on ammunition performance, etc. Here's a fun light read from the USA CMH. https://history.army.mil/html/books/010/10-10/CMH_Pub_10-10.pdf I know I have dug up some interesting papers that 'might' still be in Vintage. Way down in the weeds. Maybe we should create a sticky thread for some of these interesting studies and papers. Our grandparents tax dollars paid for them. We might as well learn from them.
     

    supercorndogs

    Ham Fisted Gorilla
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Feb 17, 2014
    7,653
    7,412
    Colorado
    Or to put it a different way, no one is saying, if you’re making sub half moa ammo, your practices don’t work or aren’t effective, they’re asking have you ever compared (using robust sample size) your current effective method to an alternative method and controlled ancillary variables? It’s fine for you to keep doing what has always worked, but if you’ve never tried something different, you don’t have an argument.

    People like @Dthomas3523 and Bryan Litz (who recently won 1st in the Nightforce ELR match) have evaluated the value of doing things like chamfering primer pockets or weighing brass, and even trimming necks on every case, etc. and have determined that if you do the important things (consistent powder drop, consistent neck diameter, good components, FL sizing) well and consistently, you can build precise ammo that’s “good enough”, and eliminate many time consuming practices.
    This is not a new revelation. The question used to be asked around here all the time. Can you shoot the difference? That should be what everyone is testing for when they add something new to their process. Shooting 100 rounds over the chronograph, trying to get your SDs down, and not knowing if it shoots even at 100y is counterproductive, and a bunch of people who didn't know any better are doing it, and giving advice that this is how its done.
     

    Dthomas3523

    Hall Monitor
    Staff member
    Moderator
    Supporter
    Commercial Supporter
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Jan 31, 2018
    10,638
    15,215
    South Texas
    People have had really good hand crafted ammo for decades and have all done it different ways. .5 moa is .5 moa. I can give you 4 sets of ammo, all performing the same but all got to that point in different ways and I would challenge anyone to tell me how I landed on each load in development. Which method did I use for each group set? There isn't reason to say which is wrong and which is right if they are equally accurate/consistent. Just don't go around saying your way is the only way to develop quality ammo bc there are 100 dudes that will disagree with you and can prove to u that their method also produces equally good ammo. In K9 training, the only thing 2 trainers can agree on is that the 3rd guy is doing it wrong. I can and have trained a focused heel, bite targeting, scent detection, and a down/stay multiple different ways on multiple different dogs. Guess what, they all learned the tasks and all executed them to my liking. Load development isn't different. The biggest deciding factor in methods imo would be safety. Thats it.

    Your example is literally the exact same scenario as “barrel break in”.

    Everyone’s method works. Which means none of them really work and the barrel functions fine in spite of the procedure, not because of it.

    The reason 100 different ways of load development works is because most all of them don’t actually produce ammo better than the other. They effectively don’t work. It’s just hard to produce bad ammo, especially with modern components.

    The most likely scenario is there are a few methods that actually produce optimal ammo for a rifle and the other 98 ways are just white noise.
     

    Dthomas3523

    Hall Monitor
    Staff member
    Moderator
    Supporter
    Commercial Supporter
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Jan 31, 2018
    10,638
    15,215
    South Texas
    So weight sorted as well as internal volume sorted cases from the same lot that have had the necks turned for uniformity and run through a mandrell are not uniform enough to take a statistical standard from arent good enough then you have no standing at all to be comenting on anything reloading related as you dont understand anything reloading related and should just sshut your mouth
    I know you are a shooter but dont asume you know eveything about shooting.

    Edit: Was mainly just poking the hornets nest @Dthomas3523 but you certainly didnt fall for it. 😁

    I definitely don’t know everything.

    But, I’ve gone back and tested my “bad” loads again after load development. And several times over with most every barrel and rifle. 99% of the shooting population never goes back and rests the “bad”.

    If they did, their world would be turned upside down. It’s not as cut and dry as it appears.
     

    XLR308

    Old Salt
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Mar 22, 2018
    3,803
    3,905
    Grand Junction, Colorado
    Touche
    I have my methods and definately dont know everything and am a bit pig headed and dogmatic with the way i approach my rifle reloading.
    After shooting the 140 hybrid in my 65CM i am fairly certain that anywere from my starting to the max i ran up to i could just pick one and it would be 1/2moa or better, the SD and ES i think would be the defining factor though.