- Thread starter JByrd
- Start date
Parts of it need to die.
Even at .1 grain incriments steves ladder still very clearly shows the nodes nothing gray or cloudy about interpertation.job well done steve on the test targets. I put my charge wts at the impacts. When it gets crowded at nodes i just draw a line out from impacts and write chargewts it keeps everything crystal so even this hillbilly can figure it out (;
Im gonna try go back today and really compare the targets of the two diff methods vs each other. Thanks again steve
Even at .1 grain incriments steves ladder still very clearly shows the nodes nothing gray or cloudy about interpertation.job well done steve on the test targets. I put my charge wts at the impacts. When it gets crowded at nodes i just draw a line out from impacts and write chargewts it keeps everything crystal so even this hillbilly can figure it out (;
Im gonna try go back today and really compare the targets of the two diff methods vs each other. Thanks again steve
Last edited:
Just kinda hit me as well, if the ladder is done at .1 incriments or .2 incriments instead of two shots at the same charge wt you eliminate human err even more and get more data points as a bonus. Thats good thinkin. I usually did a .5 jump then a second at .2-.3 in the hot spots that interested me, i may just standardize to a single test at .2 or .1 jumps and get it done all at once. Anyway, better than burnin multi shots at same charge wt. Smart thinkin
I gotta get up in an hour, i think about this stuff waaaaay too much (;
I gotta get up in an hour, i think about this stuff waaaaay too much (;
Last edited:
I can't see what you're seeing at shots 5, 6, and 7... those don't look tight enough to call a node in my opinion. These shots are actually very close to the scatter node in the 42.4 grain area.
I agree with procovert on the .1 graduations too, as that'll help avoid giving only one shot to an area that might give trouble.
Just hang around 43 to 43.3 and areas in between and you'll do well.
I agree with procovert on the .1 graduations too, as that'll help avoid giving only one shot to an area that might give trouble.
Just hang around 43 to 43.3 and areas in between and you'll do well.
Last edited:
No offense to Steve, but I would have thrown the ladder test out.
I see four excuses that have a significant outcome on the determination of the accuracy nodes.
At this point I'd at the very least want the ladder test rerun to give solid data.
I see four excuses that have a significant outcome on the determination of the accuracy nodes.
At this point I'd at the very least want the ladder test rerun to give solid data.
Just for the record...I know that, you know that, "many "(not saying you Rommel) think if any group is tight at 100Y it's going to be tight at distance. I stated earlier in this thread not necessarily, it might or it might not. Dan said himself that once a node is found it should be tested at distance.
I'd almost consider running the ladder again for the sake of clarity but clearly there is a node at around 43.2 grains. Also I want this barrel to last at least one year so I'm going to do a little more testing for seating depth and SD and call it good. Also I'm not a benchrest shooter, I'm a steel shooter. I just want a reasonably accurate load that'l be consistent year around.
But still I'll take a 5 shot .9" group at 400Y """(OH YEAH)""" with a half grain difference in charge weight, "including excuses" any day, LOL.
When a person does a ladder it is assumed that there is going to be some kind of wind, thus the horizontal is not critical as we are looking at where the vertical stops. Although yes if the wind condition remains constant the Horizontal will tighten when the node is hit.
Dude, I'm not trying to insult, put down or diminish anyone. My intent was to see if the nodes correlated between a ladder and a OCW or not.
Dan has been very helpful and polite in every respect. I like him and I don't see a problem other than a disagreement concerning the lower node. In fact if I only had access to a 100 yard range I'd do OCW's and pay Dan for his advise!
Understandable. I'm thinking from a purely comparison OCW vs ladder standpoint.
From a load development standpoint, whatever works to produce the best load in your mind in your rifle go with it. Ladder and OCW have both produced many great loads.
I favour the OCW because it's worked for me in the past and I live in Nebraska where a 10 mph wind with +/- 10 mph gust is considered a calm day. And that's gotten worse since farmers have had a hard one to destroy shelter belts over the last few years. But that's a whole different story.
