• Watch Out for Scammers!

    We've now added a color code for all accounts. Orange accounts are new members, Blue are full members, and Green are Supporters. If you get a message about a sale from an orange account, make sure you pay attention before sending any money!

Load to the kernel or +-.02

LawnMM said:
+/- 0.02 won't matter

Whether or not you have a clue wtf you're doing matters 10,000x more
Click to expand...
What planet are you on?
Ofcourse it matters if you're into a scale & trickler for $1000+. Otherwise, it don't matter.
 
Barelstroker said:
Anyone else seen brianf's latest vid on primer sorting?

Interesting results. Especially the velocity difference between min & max weight primer groups.
More than enough velocity spread to upset an X count.
Click to expand...


Oh fuck. Now we need to start weight sorting primers!
 
  • Haha
  • Sad
Reactions: BCX and JB.IC
Barelstroker said:
What planet are you on?
Ofcourse it matters if you're into a scale & trickler for $1000+. Otherwise, it don't matter.
Click to expand...
The difference between 0.1 and 0.02 can matter depending on the consistency and distance

The distance between say 40.00 and 40.02 is pissing in the ocean

I'm not saying the scales useless, I'm saying let it do it's thing and don't obsess if it throws a charge 0.02 over or under your target weight.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tokay444
Barelstroker said:
Anyone else seen brianf's latest vid on primer sorting?

Interesting results. Especially the velocity difference between min & max weight primer groups.
More than enough velocity spread to upset an X count.
Click to expand...

it would be good if you watched another video:



BR4 are not needet to sort weight, at least at those sample.
 
First off. Accuracy of a digital scale can never be better than ± 1 digit of the LSD (Least Significant Digit).

Reason; Say you have a scale that was accurate to ± 0.0001 grain, But has a LSD of 0.02 grains then 40.0100 grains would weigh the same as 40.0299 – an accuracy of 0.02 not 0.0001.

That is not considering: Scale calibration, changes in barometric pressure, fluctuations of temperature, ect.

2nd. As to the need of ± 0.02 grains, there are other factors that will negate a powder change of 0.02 grains such as neck tension, bullet seating depth and bullet manufactures tolerance that can only be measured to a given tolerance.

As several have pointed out that a well-developed load will not notice a ± 0.1 grain change in powder. I do weight to with-in 0.02 grains, which unlike some “rod” powders, for ball powders can be several granules. Reason is that it is no harder to measure 0.02 grains than it is to measure 0.1 grains.
 
Last edited:
Shouldn't matter. My 6.5x47 load is 37.7 Varget. The window I let the auto trickler throw to is 37.68 to 37.72 and I have not noticed any dope effects out to 1200 yards.
 
Feniks Technologies said:
Depends on my goal. I don’t weigh brass as most of the weight difference is in the rim. H2O can have some differences that matter. But depending on the brand, may be of no consequence. I’ll measure bullets, then trim/point. Seat primers the same depth and such. Then load to kernel.

That’s for serious load tweaking for tiny groups at distance.

For prs……as long as it’s .02 either way (and somtimes .04)…..it’s going in the case and I won’t notice it at all during a match.

I do keep my v4 and did keep my v3 setup to where it would mainly be under .02 or dead on, rarely ever overthrows to .02.
Click to expand...
How did you adjust your V3 to go to dead on vs .02 under? I may just be misinterpreting your post here so if that's the case, just clarify and I will move on... now that I have a better situation with static or lack there of, I find myself wishing I could get my scale to stay at .02 under or to throw dead on every time. So far as I know, the only way do it is to use the .02 under charge and then to dump any charge that's dead on or over. Of course that adds considerable time, so I'm just wondering if you had some other trick to get more consistency?
 
Ledzep said:
20x without annealing is more like a 6-10x without annealing before it totally shits the bed and it's a steady velocity walk on the way. Much over 4x firings without annealing has serious potential to really start to skew ES/SD and avg MV.
Click to expand...

Depending on cartridge and rifle variables I agree, 3 to 5 loadings without annealing and I definitely notice needed die adjustments, Inconsistent seating pressures and ES.
 
Barelstroker said:
Anyone else seen brianf's latest vid on primer sorting?

Interesting results. Especially the velocity difference between min & max weight primer groups.
More than enough velocity spread to upset an X count.
Click to expand...

I don’t think @brianf is Witchdoctor, but I could be wrong.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: brianf
Tokay444 said:
I don’t think @brianf is Whitchdoctor, but I could be wrong.
Click to expand...
Witch doctor is a local guy here in Washington
Well known for short range bench rest.

That was a interesting video and his backpack ( doctorate in sciency stuff with published papers) gives me confidence in his results.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tokay444
MarkyMark007 said:
it would be good if you watched another video:



BR4 are not needet to sort weight, at least at those sample.
Click to expand...

Strange how the BR4's produced significantly higher velocity than the 450 "magnum" primers.

I know from my testing of 308 load development, Rem 91/2 always produce more consistent velocity ES than CCI 200 all else being equal, as well as higher velocity & better results on target.
 
MarkyMark007 said:
it would be good if you watched another video:



BR4 are not needet to sort weight, at least at those sample.
Click to expand...


When he said "linear correlation between primer weight and group size" I threw up in my mouth a little.
 
Steel head said:
Depending on cartridge and rifle variables I agree, 3 to 5 loadings without annealing and I definitely notice needed die adjustments, Inconsistent seating pressures and ES.
Click to expand...
I had a 338 LM AI load which held almost 0 vertical at 1k up till the 4th firing on the cases. # 4 batch went to shit. Shortly after i ordered a AMP Mark 2. 5th batch went back to normal... costly experiment on my part but now I'm a believer in the AMP!!
 
I saw marked improvements in ES/SD when I went from Magnum primers to BR2's.

Kinda curious to see what gnat's ass consistency in powder charges and BR2 primers would make.

Mike
 
Anyone interested in weight sorting 7k Fed 215M for me :ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:
 
  • Haha
Reactions: OkieMike
BCX said:
Anyone interested in weight sorting 7k Fed 215M for me :ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:
Click to expand...
Sure bring them over. I'll weigh them, sort them and let you know how they shoot!
 
Nick, to be honest w you. The time you text me about measuring and weighing primers,, i thought you lost it but you may be onto something :ROFLMAO:
 
BCX said:
Nick, to be honest w you. The time you text me about measuring and weighing primers,, i thought you lost it but you may be onto something :ROFLMAO:
Click to expand...
We'll see how much I'm on to when we run our test at 1k.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BCX
Barelstroker said:
Strange how the BR4's produced significantly higher velocity than the 450 "magnum" primers.

I know from my testing of 308 load development, Rem 91/2 always produce more consistent velocity ES than CCI 200 all else being equal, as well as higher velocity & better results on target.
Click to expand...

in most tests on the net i saw BR4 are hotter than 450.

maybe you were out of tune for powder charge with 200, like in YT test with BR4. maybe because of higher velocity you both were out of tune and that's way you both get higher ES/SD...?
 
I didn’t know we were to the point of picking Knat shit out of the pepper.

This reminds me of an idea for a thread I had in mind. First list all the variables, then sort them in order of priority. Probably a waste of time though
 
Not sure about other primers, but I have done some experimenting with WLP and CCI BR2. There was no measurable difference in group size, or speed. The groups for each different load even were the same pattern.

I did the same charge weight and seating depth , 3 shot groups for both primers, as well as doing the same for 3 shot groups with seating depth and every time the group size and pattern were very comparable. Of course I wouldn't apply this conclusion to another other primer comparison accept these two.
 
MarkyMark007 said:
in most tests on the net i saw BR4 are hotter than 450.

maybe you were out of tune for powder charge with 200, like in YT test with BR4. maybe because of higher velocity you both were out of tune and that's way you both get higher ES/SD...?
Click to expand...
Not in my case. I had similar results with my 243. I've done a lot of load development with both those cartridges. For the 1st 8 or 9 lots of each, I was using CCI 200's exclusively thinking that they'd be more consistent than the Rems. It wasn't until I ran low on the CCI's & started replicating loads with the Rems that I noticed the differences. All my testing is done with 8x5 shot groups with every shot over a chronograph & the groups recorded with range buddy so the results are statistically significant IMO.
Over the last 6 months or so, I've been using GRT to find the OBT velocity & adjust the initial charge weight & initial pressure to match. It was with 2 identical 308 loads with the exception of the primer when I noticed a significant reduction in group size & had to adjust the charges to match velocities. The velocity difference was about 80 ft/s with the Rem 9 1/2's the higher velocity.
The Rem's also match the initial load entered into GRT expected velocities much closer than with the CCI's.
Since then, I've been replicating some of my previous 308 & 243 loads using the Rem's with improved results with every load so far.
I think the Rem's are under-rated.
 
Barelstroker said:
Not in my case. I had similar results with my 243. I've done a lot of load development with both those cartridges. For the 1st 8 or 9 lots of each, I was using CCI 200's exclusively thinking that they'd be more consistent than the Rems. It wasn't until I ran low on the CCI's & started replicating loads with the Rems that I noticed the differences. All my testing is done with 8x5 shot groups with every shot over a chronograph & the groups recorded with range buddy so the results are statistically significant IMO.
Over the last 6 months or so, I've been using GRT to find the OBT velocity & adjust the initial charge weight & initial pressure to match. It was with 2 identical 308 loads with the exception of the primer when I noticed a significant reduction in group size & had to adjust the charges to match velocities. The velocity difference was about 80 ft/s with the Rem 9 1/2's the higher velocity.
The Rem's also match the initial load entered into GRT expected velocities much closer than with the CCI's.
Since then, I've been replicating some of my previous 308 & 243 loads using the Rem's with improved results with every load so far.
I think the Rem's are under-rated.
Click to expand...
Just ignore him. He shoots less than 1500 rounds per year and speaks like he's an authority figure on the subject matter.
He hasn't even done his own testing. Just regurgitates what he, "saw on the net..."
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Steel head
I finally got my shipping notification for my Autotrickler V4 so I’m looking forward to seeing if I can get any improvement on my loads.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BCX
Punkur67 said:
Uhhhh. I did not know there was any other way! What SD do you like to see on your lengths?
Click to expand...

SD is for suckers.

I’m all about ES.

AND you have to, pay attention now, this is important, make sure which end is longer than the other. If you have a stick that’s 0.00000001“ longer than the rest, it matters if it’s the left side that’s longer, but not the right.




P
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Punkur67
Pharmseller said:
SD is for suckers.

I’m all about ES.

AND you have to, pay attention now, this is important, make sure which end is longer than the other. If you have a stick that’s 0.00000001“ longer than the rest, it matters if it’s the left side that’s longer, but not the right.




P
Click to expand...
Ehh. Call me when your full length sizing them before trimming. If you want single digit ES velocities you must resize the sticks
 
Punkur67 said:
Ehh. Call me when your full length sizing them before trimming. If you want single digit ES velocities you must resize the sticks
Click to expand...

Piker.

I turn the necks, but only on the left side, after trimming.

Don’t even get me started on charging the case one stick at a time.

You have to layer the sticks to form a Möbius strip surrounded by a Rhombicosidodecahedron.

Inverted, clearly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Punkur67
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

sacklunch
repeat load dev if adding a suppressor?
Replies
16
Views
285
Aftermath
Aftermath
locash78
Help with hunting load
Replies
19
Views
294
Aftermath
Aftermath
Cole440
Starting Load Workup With Factory Ammo?
Replies
39
Views
743
Cole440
Cole440
AR-180
Some combinations just don’t work, but some are like magic
Replies
3
Views
357
AR-180
AR-180
ZA206
6.5CM.... 140 vs. 147 ELDM....
Replies
9
Views
807
chevy_man
C
Top Bottom
Back