we need a crying orkan meme

[Feniks Technologies]

So what is the eventual takeaway? That components and machining have gotten really good, and basically what matters is to be within +-.1 grains of powder, somewhere in the "normal range" of pressure for the cartridge with a powder in the correct burn rate range, with good controls over neck tension and seating depth? And to shoot a shit ton so as to learn to take out whatever wildness you add to the equation, which, absent specialized gear, is likely to be greater than the benefit of one of these magic wand acts?

I mean it makes sense, but it is depressingly pedestrian when you think about it.

I think this is probably a big reason people keep digging.

We don’t want to accept there isn’t voodoo and we can’t believe it’s this simple.

 

[impactaddict]

I think this is probably a big reason people keep digging.

We don’t want to accept there isn’t voodoo and we can’t believe it’s this simple.

I used to think I knew how to tackle the problem but after this thread, I'm not certain about anything anymore. I thought running a velocity ladder test (a la Satterlee) to find a speed I liked (not necessarily a "flat spot") then test seating depth was a great start. Usually spend 25 rounds and you can take that load to a match and be competitive. Threads like this give me pause because I thought it was simple.

Since you produced the ammo that was the talk of the PRE, I would like to know what YOU would do and where YOU would start in this scenario. The reloader has the right tools for the job, expensive equipment, turns out consistent loads, finishes in the top of the pack from time to time - you know the type. If OCW isn't statistically a great option for powder charge and velocity flat spots are a myth, where would someone start if they're loading a new (to them) cartridge in a fresh barrel? Is my 25 round +/- in load development done in vain? I'm sorry if I've missed it somewhere.

 

[Gohring65]

Let’s not forget Franks experiment where he was able to change velocity with shoulder pressure variances. How’s one to have a standard without a constant and consistent pressure on the butt plate.
Damn, that was useless I know.
Just stirring shit.

 

[Feniks Technologies]

I used to think I knew how to tackle the problem but after this thread, I'm not certain about anything anymore. I thought running a velocity ladder test (a la Satterlee) to find a speed I liked (not necessarily a "flat spot") then test seating depth was a great start. Usually spend 25 rounds and you can take that load to a match and be competitive. Threads like this give me pause because I thought it was simple.

Since you produced the ammo that was the talk of the PRE, I would like to know what YOU would do and where YOU would start in this scenario. The reloader has the right tools for the job, expensive equipment, turns out consistent loads, finishes in the top of the pack from time to time - you know the type. If OCW isn't statistically a great option for powder charge and velocity flat spots are a myth, where would someone start if they're loading a new (to them) cartridge in a fresh barrel? Is my 25 round +/- in load development done in vain? I'm sorry if I've missed it somewhere.

For PRS/practical/steel shooting? I’m assuming yes.

Buy good components. Let’s say Berger bullets (I used a-tips and pva solids at the PRE, they are obviously top shelf components), Lapua brass, and high quality powder that is proper for the cartridge (varget, h4350, n1/500 series, etc). And good primers (cci and federal).

Load as close to the kernel as you can. A charge master used properly can do this. An fx120 setup is easy button.

Decide a speed you want to run. Do you want to run a 2775 br/gt at prs for recoil and trace or a 6cm solid at 3400 for super flat trajectory? Either makes sense in the right scenario. Just decide what you want to do.

Do a Satterlee style ladder (not for flat spots, just to get an idea what charge gets you close to that speed). If you are running fast, take it up to pressure so you know you’re safely under. If it’s a 2800 6mm, no need to take to pressure cause you’re well below.

Now that you know the charge weight, do a seating depth test. Look for a wide “node” that gives you .5 or less at 100yds that *should* last through the barrel erosion of a match (look at mark Gordon’s stuff, it’s good for this), and load on the long side. This gives you the best chance to shoot well for large amount of rounds as barrel erodes.

Now you have powder charge and seating depth. Load 30 rounds. Shoot over chrono. Your average speed is what you want to do with your software (or you can use real world dope to true velocity). I find that 30 round velocity + AB custom curve works extremely well if your software has the correct inputs.

Done. It’s not many rounds.


To recap:

- top shelf components
- Pick speed
- find charge weight for that speed
- find seating depth
- load with consistent charge weight and brass prep
- shoot 30 rounds/dope rifle
- done

 

[kthomas]

^ Do that.

Biggest part is using good quality components on good reloading equipment. Develop a simple and repeatable reloading process.

Reloading is pretty simple when you use good quality components and gear.

 

[Feniks Technologies]

I used similar method above (I abbreviated some for the expo based on prior knowledge) for the PRE ammo.

A 300prc with 230gr A-Tips and 6cm with both weight competition solids from PVA.

@Mike Casselton and others can confirm how the ammo performed at the expo with a steady flow of literal random shooters.

 

[Gohring65]

One way to answer is, there is no bench rest guns that look like prs guns.
Bench rest guns are ugly as shit, nobody wants a gun to look like that, even the process with follow up shots are unconventional in terms of conventional bolt actions. They are built that way because they shoot one hole groups that way.

 

[Feniks Technologies]

I used to think I knew how to tackle the problem but after this thread, I'm not certain about anything anymore. I thought running a velocity ladder test (a la Satterlee) to find a speed I liked (not necessarily a "flat spot") then test seating depth was a great start. Usually spend 25 rounds and you can take that load to a match and be competitive. Threads like this give me pause because I thought it was simple.

Since you produced the ammo that was the talk of the PRE, I would like to know what YOU would do and where YOU would start in this scenario. The reloader has the right tools for the job, expensive equipment, turns out consistent loads, finishes in the top of the pack from time to time - you know the type. If OCW isn't statistically a great option for powder charge and velocity flat spots are a myth, where would someone start if they're loading a new (to them) cartridge in a fresh barrel? Is my 25 round +/- in load development done in vain? I'm sorry if I've missed it somewhere.

But no, you’re not doing anything in vain.

For example, this method will get you ammo plenty fine for prs:

6br

- 29.5 or 30.0 varget
- 105 or 109 Berger .020 jump

6gt

- 34.0 varget
- 105 or 109 berger 0.020 jump


Or take a 6.5 or 6cm, find a powder charge area that you see on every forum and jump a Berger .020

Load your ammo and dope your rifle. Be consistent with powder and brass prep.


You’ll never lose an PRS match because of your ammo.

 

[Feniks Technologies]

To put it in perspective:

A 109 berger with an ES of 50fps

600 yds

- 2900fps = 3.3 mil or 73” drop
- 2950fps = 3.2 mil or 69” drop

1000 yds

- 2900fps = 7.7 mil or 277” drop
- 2950fps = 7.4 mil or 267” drop


Does anyone here think they are going to lose a prs match with those numbers? If so, then you’re at the very top pack and you lose because you missed a .5 moa on a kyl rack at 600+ yds.

Everyone else……it ain’t the ammo.

 

[Feniks Technologies]

I 100% agree especially on 2moa plus targets. But, on a 1 moa target, that’s 3” margin of error up and 3” margin of error down at 600 yards so that 4” could very well make a difference at 600

When was the last time you lost a match with that scenario?

Until it happens, and happens often enough, it doesn’t matter for that particular shooter.

 

[brianf]

I used similar method above (I abbreviated some for the expo based on prior knowledge) for the PRE ammo.

A 300prc with 230gr A-Tips and 6cm with both weight competition solids from PVA.

@Mike Casselton and others can confirm how the ammo performed at the expo with a steady flow of literal random shooters.

…hey ..I didn’t even get a shot off those 2 days!!

 

[Carl_Ross]

************** Anecdote time

I've been shooting 6 Dasher for comps since 2017. After the second or third barrel I basically stopped trying any type of OCW or ladders and just loaded for the velocity/pressure I was comfortable with. All because at the end of shooting a series of powder charges I'd look at them all, and conclude that they'd all do fine and the difference between a single three shot group in the .1's vs the .2's or .3's was just noise, same with POI. I WAS stacking the deck with quality barrels and components.

I may be biased as I love shooting, tolerate reloading, and dislike "chores" like load development that use up time and components but don't make me any better at shooting.

Anyways, my experience makes me plenty comfortable changing up my load if needed shortly before a shoot. We had a match a couple weeks ago, and the day before I hit the range to zero and get drops on my rifle and a loaner rifle. My rifle's load was getting some clickers, which I incorrectly assumed was pressure (it was a freshly sized batch of brass that was too tight in the web for that chamber). Thinking I was seeing pressure, I dropped my charge .5 that night, and threw all my charges for the next day out of a Harrell's thrower for speed. Confirmed zero in the morning (hadn't changed), shot a handful at 1100 to figure velocity (my chrono is down for a minute), tweaked my data and shot the match. I dropped four shots on missed wind calls and one on rushing a follow-up on a target that was still swinging. Finished first of the losers, but it certainly wasn't due to my load.

**************


I've been following Ledzep's post's on his testing for a while. His results match up with what I've been suspecting for a while now, and I greatly appreciate the lengths he has gone to in the interest of controlling variables and gathering statistically significant and defensible data. Doubly so considering that I don't have access to the tools/toys/facilities he's used to get there. Zep, if you continue to test and post results, I'll be paying close attention...

 

[impactaddict]

For PRS/practical/steel shooting? I’m assuming yes.

Buy good components. Let’s say Berger bullets (I used a-tips and pva solids at the PRE, they are obviously top shelf components), Lapua brass, and high quality powder that is proper for the cartridge (varget, h4350, n1/500 series, etc). And good primers (cci and federal).

Load as close to the kernel as you can. A charge master used properly can do this. An fx120 setup is easy button.

Decide a speed you want to run. Do you want to run a 2775 br/gt at prs for recoil and trace or a 6cm solid at 3400 for super flat trajectory? Either makes sense in the right scenario. Just decide what you want to do.

Do a Satterlee style ladder (not for flat spots, just to get an idea what charge gets you close to that speed). If you are running fast, take it up to pressure so you know you’re safely under. If it’s a 2800 6mm, no need to take to pressure cause you’re well below.

Now that you know the charge weight, do a seating depth test. Look for a wide “node” that gives you .5 or less at 100yds that *should* last through the barrel erosion of a match (look at mark Gordon’s stuff, it’s good for this), and load on the long side. This gives you the best chance to shoot well for large amount of rounds as barrel erodes.

Now you have powder charge and seating depth. Load 30 rounds. Shoot over chrono. Your average speed is what you want to do with your software (or you can use real world dope to true velocity). I find that 30 round velocity + AB custom curve works extremely well if your software has the correct inputs.

Done. It’s not many rounds.


To recap:

- top shelf components
- Pick speed
- find charge weight for that speed
- find seating depth
- load with consistent charge weight and brass prep
- shoot 30 rounds/dope rifle
- done

Thanks for the write up and confirmation that I’m not wasting components. It should be stickied and labeled. Load development - stop making it so hard.

Looks close to the process I’m currently running with some minor differences that I’ll adopt. Quality components and good tools have made life easier for sure.

 

[Tiger_Shilone]

Extremely disappointed I am, at all of you. 10 pages and a couple of weeks of eagerly looking forward to seeing a “Crying Orkan” meme and the only person who even posts a decent meme is Spife , and it doesn’t have Orkan in it. (But it is amusing). This thread is way off track from it’s title.

View attachment 7803213

 

[357Max]

 

[Franko]

For PRS/practical/steel shooting? I’m assuming yes.

Buy good components. Let’s say Berger bullets (I used a-tips and pva solids at the PRE, they are obviously top shelf components), Lapua brass, and high quality powder that is proper for the cartridge (varget, h4350, n1/500 series, etc). And good primers (cci and federal).

Load as close to the kernel as you can. A charge master used properly can do this. An fx120 setup is easy button.

Decide a speed you want to run. Do you want to run a 2775 br/gt at prs for recoil and trace or a 6cm solid at 3400 for super flat trajectory? Either makes sense in the right scenario. Just decide what you want to do.

Do a Satterlee style ladder (not for flat spots, just to get an idea what charge gets you close to that speed). If you are running fast, take it up to pressure so you know you’re safely under. If it’s a 2800 6mm, no need to take to pressure cause you’re well below.

Now that you know the charge weight, do a seating depth test. Look for a wide “node” that gives you .5 or less at 100yds that *should* last through the barrel erosion of a match (look at mark Gordon’s stuff, it’s good for this), and load on the long side. This gives you the best chance to shoot well for large amount of rounds as barrel erodes.

Now you have powder charge and seating depth. Load 30 rounds. Shoot over chrono. Your average speed is what you want to do with your software (or you can use real world dope to true velocity). I find that 30 round velocity + AB custom curve works extremely well if your software has the correct inputs.

Done. It’s not many rounds.


To recap:

- top shelf components
- Pick speed
- find charge weight for that speed
- find seating depth
- load with consistent charge weight and brass prep
- shoot 30 rounds/dope rifle
- done

It's threads like this one that have sold me on just picking a speed and that my ES/SD numbers are going to be a reflection of my ability to maintain a good repeatable reloading process (annealing, consistent charge weight, etc.). However, I am still hung up on picking the right seating depth, Could you go into more detail on how you approach this part of the equation:

1. How do you decide on what depths for your initial test? Do you use Berger's approach of testing at .01, .05, .09, and .13 of jump? Or do you use something else?
2. How many shots are necessary to determine if a particular depth is "good", and what constitutes "good", or is it a matter of "good enough"?
3. Do you test the width of your seating depth nodes?
4. If yes, how, and what is an acceptable width for seating depth?

Thanks to everyone in this thread for sharing their knowledge.

P.S. Orkan may have the last laugh as I did order his CPS because my OCD is kicking hard and I am too old to hand prime

 

[Gohring65]

It's threads like this one that have sold me on just picking a speed and that my ES/SD numbers are going to be a reflection of my ability to maintain a good repeatable reloading process (annealing, consistent charge weight, etc.). However, I am still hung up on picking the right seating depth, Could you go into more detail on how you approach this part of the equation:

1. How do you decide on what depths for your initial test? Do you use Berger's approach of testing at .01, .05, .09, and .13 of jump? Or do you use something else?
2. How many shots are necessary to determine if a particular depth is "good", and what constitutes "good", or is it a matter of "good enough"?
3. Do you test the width of your seating depth nodes?
4. If yes, how, and what is an acceptable width for seating depth?

Thanks to everyone in this thread for sharing their knowledge.

P.S. Orkan may have the last laugh as I did order his CPS because my OCD is kicking hard and I am too old to hand prime

I know this isn’t directed towards me, I’m a nobody. But I start at absolute mag length and work backwards .003” at a time. Usually find it pretty early on the first “good enough” length, and there’s usually a second “good enough” length a little deeper.

 

[Feniks Technologies]

It's threads like this one that have sold me on just picking a speed and that my ES/SD numbers are going to be a reflection of my ability to maintain a good repeatable reloading process (annealing, consistent charge weight, etc.). However, I am still hung up on picking the right seating depth, Could you go into more detail on how you approach this part of the equation:

1. How do you decide on what depths for your initial test? Do you use Berger's approach of testing at .01, .05, .09, and .13 of jump? Or do you use something else?
2. How many shots are necessary to determine if a particular depth is "good", and what constitutes "good", or is it a matter of "good enough"?
3. Do you test the width of your seating depth nodes?
4. If yes, how, and what is an acceptable width for seating depth?

Thanks to everyone in this thread for sharing their knowledge.

P.S. Orkan may have the last laugh as I did order his CPS because my OCD is kicking hard and I am too old to hand prime

I’ve found that most of the popular methods (berger/litz, cortina, etc) all work for shooting steel.

You also have to keep in mind throat erosion. The faster it erodes, the longer the “node” needs to be. Of course, that’s with the assumption that your group size and/or poi will change enough to miss with the erosion. That’s another conversation and testing data set.

 

[Feniks Technologies]

…hey ..I didn’t even get a shot off those 2 days!!

Not for the lack of me telling you to go shoot the damn things.

 

[Mike Casselton]

…hey ..I didn’t even get a shot off those 2 days!!

All I seent ya do was talk, talk, talk.

 

[Barelstroker]

I used to think I knew how to tackle the problem but after this thread, I'm not certain about anything anymore. I thought running a velocity ladder test (a la Satterlee) to find a speed I liked (not necessarily a "flat spot") then test seating depth was a great start. Usually spend 25 rounds and you can take that load to a match and be competitive. Threads like this give me pause because I thought it was simple.

Since you produced the ammo that was the talk of the PRE, I would like to know what YOU would do and where YOU would start in this scenario. The reloader has the right tools for the job, expensive equipment, turns out consistent loads, finishes in the top of the pack from time to time - you know the type. If OCW isn't statistically a great option for powder charge and velocity flat spots are a myth, where would someone start if they're loading a new (to them) cartridge in a fresh barrel? Is my 25 round +/- in load development done in vain? I'm sorry if I've missed it somewhere.

In my opinion your 25 round load development is better than a couple 3 shot groups & call it good.
The start of accuracy or any attempt at improving it is to get high quality brass & bullets. Powders that are known to perform well, sizing cases to 0.002"-0.003" bump headspace, getting as close to the lands as you dare & maybe check to ensure your sizing & seating settup is producing reasonably concentric ammo. From there on in, try some varying powder charges, adjust the seating depth & see what you get. If a couple 5 shot groups show promise, load up another 20 & shoot 4x 5 shot groups. If you're happy, you're all set to go.

 

[Feniks Technologies]

Let’s not forget Franks experiment where he was able to change velocity with shoulder pressure variances. How’s one to have a standard without a constant and consistent pressure on the butt plate.
Damn, that was useless I know.
Just stirring shit.

Just for conversation purposes. I zero my prs rifle off a barricade. I do three sets of 10 build and break drills, for a total of 30 rounds. I do first set, then move either vertical or horizontal. Do another set and move the remaining. Do another set to confirm zero. Switching from sitting, kneeling, standing, and a couple prone.

I do this with the moderate pressure (a variation of free recoil most everyone uses now) with my shoulder, just like I would in a match. And I have the Labradar running. So, I achieve:

- A zero from the positions and style I’ll be using the rifle the most

- 30 round velocity average

- 30 round zero (better than 3 unless you got really fortunate with your 3)

- 30 position build and break practice

Then I dope the rifle at 300, 600, 800, 1k. Prone, but I’m not necessarily doing the whole perfect bridge/bipod load. As if you are pushed for time, you won’t in a match.

And then I might do a few barricade/props @ 600 or 800 to verify my dope is working for every position in close and at distance in case the way I was driving the rifle messed something up.


Sounds like a lot and maybe it is. But I’ll quote Haken Spuhr “anything worth killing is worth over killing.”

 

[Barelstroker]

Has anyone seen Orkans latest vid?
A bit slow I thought but, there were quite a few good tidbits that would normally never arise.
It's a hard one but, I thank Orkan for his commitment. It's hard showing the raw stuff on video. The imperfections that show what's really going on. The vid was slow but, I learned a lot of shit from it.
Fuck me Orkan, just get the 10ths of 10 thousands correct & we're good to go. You're a bit too quick to go hard.
Sometimes you're like a young man with pussy in front of him.

 

[secondofangle2]

Sometimes you're like a young man with pussy in front of him.

hahahhahahah

Can you spare the rest of us the tedium of watching the whole thing? What are the top 3-5 things he said that we should take under consideration?

 

[Mike Casselton]

hahahhahahah

Can you spare the rest of us the tedium of watching the whole thing? What are the top 3-5 things he said that we should take under consideration?

 

[secondofangle2]

It’s a 4 hour video. I’ll pass

 

[BigPrince]

Someone isn't happy with y'all?

 

[Choid]

Someone isn't happy with y'all?

That's fucking insane shit. Persecuted? lol. Literally the best thing for an "innovator" is to have his idea torn apart and examined. It is the definition of the scientific method. Push something to failure, see if it fails. If you don't want that, you are either (justifiably) scared, or selling snake oil.

 

[Steel head]

^^^
He made his own crying orkan video

 

[BuildingConceptsllc]

That's fucking insane shit. Persecuted? lol. Literally the best thing for an "innovator" is to have his idea torn apart and examined. It is the definition of the scientific method. Push something to failure, see if it fails. If you don't want that, you are either (justifiably) scared, or selling snake oil.

I hear ya, and I'm all for "if ya can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen" and all that stuff..... At the same time, there's a reason hardly any industry professionals discuss stuff here, and we all know the reality of it. There's a way to do things, and then there's a way not to do things.... We would all benefit by a lot more real expertise from guys who really are experts, and real discussion if more folks would go about things the right way.

 

[Choid]

I hear ya, and I'm all for "if ya can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen" and all that stuff..... At the same time, there's a reason hardly any industry professionals discuss stuff here, and we all know the reality of it. There's a way to do things, and then there's a way not to do things.... We would all benefit by a lot more real expertise from guys who really are experts, and real discussion if more folks would go about things the right way.

Admittedly, I am not an expert on anything other than how to buy lots of cool reloading gear, but I actually find that when people show expertise*, they get a pretty good response. But there is a difference between how industry, and self styled experts, present things, and how enthusiasts do. The former is basically marketing their goods, and doesn't spend time discussing nuts and bolts stuff, which is fine, because it is safe for them, but you are right that it distances them from a forum of enthusiasts. On the other hand, you have guys like @Terry Cross and @MikeRTacOps who are clearly both manufacturers and enthusiasts (there are surely more,) and really spend the time interacting with people here, not asking to be seen as Gods. I mean, can you imagine either of them posting some whining bitch video about how people persecute them?

So I think you are right that forums are not necessarily the best places for manufacturers, unless you are talking a real fanboy forum. And we probably lose for that. On the other hand, is it a feature or a bug that most people here don't buy marketing speak? To me it is probably a feature. I'll take a D Thomas or a Led Zep as an expert any day, though I do think it would be awesome if we had more manufacturers who were really willing to get in depth, but I think the liability issues are probably onerous.

*The exception is, of course, the Bear Pit where being as dumb and knowledge free is a badge of honor ;-).

 

[BuildingConceptsllc]

Admittedly, I am not an expert on anything other than how to buy lots of cool reloading gear, but I actually find that when people show expertise*, they get a pretty good response. But there is a difference between how industry, and self styled experts, present things, and how enthusiasts do. The former is basically marketing their goods, and doesn't spend time discussing nuts and bolts stuff, which is fine, because it is safe for them, but you are right that it distances them from a forum of enthusiasts. On the other hand, you have guys like @Terry Cross and @MikeRTacOps who are clearly both manufacturers and enthusiasts (there are surely more,) and really spend the time interacting with people here, not asking to be seen as Gods. I mean, can you imagine either of them posting some whining bitch video about how people persecute them?

So I think you are right that forums are not necessarily the best places for manufacturers, unless you are talking a real fanboy forum. And we probably lose for that. On the other hand, is it a feature or a bug that most people here don't buy marketing speak? To me it is probably a feature. I'll take a D Thomas or a Led Zep as an expert any day, though I do think it would be awesome if we had more manufacturers who were really willing to get in depth, but I think the liability issues are probably onerous.

*The exception is, of course, the Bear Pit where being as dumb and knowledge free is a badge of honor ;-).

That's a fair point and response.

 

[Choid]

That's a fair point and response.

FWIW, I am not saying it wouldn't be great, because it would be. But I think the level of knowledge here makes it hard for a manufacturer, say somebody like Daniel Defense, to come in and say "our new precision rifle is going to blow everybody out of the water etc." when, for better or worse, three dozen guys here know more than any customer rep out there.

Orkan wants people to bow down because he cleans cases with rice while being persecuted, and while I think he makes really good products, I don't think that his attitude makes sense at all.

 

[Painless300]

I actually think Greg makes some very good points in his video. Some of the same members in this post are some of the ones that have roasted me before by just asking a simple question that wasn’t even controversial. It actually caused me to reach out a call other experts, Greg being one of them, for help when I was getting started in shooting and reloading. So I guess I should thank you.
I realize this is a public forum and anytime you post and put yourself out there you open yourself up for criticism, but what I don’t understand is when I used to go to a local or even regional competition most everyone I meet are really great folks and eager to help or eager to learn. I guess some of you love to run others down to make yourself feel better.
Greg is a great resource for me and has really helped me ring out much more accuracy out of my rifles by improving my form, equipment and reloading techniques. Maybe if you disagree with what he says try picking up the phone and giving him a call and discussing the topic instead engaging in childish rants on an open forum. Not saying Greg, myself or anyone else is perfect but we can always improve our communication skills and try to be helpful instead of hurtful.

 

[Emerson0311]

View attachment 7794131

I don't really see a trend that I would bet money on just yet. I agree with his conclusion that .009" seating depth is better than the others in this data set, but with equal graduations being taken per step, simply having one dip down isn't necessarily kicking my "trend" button. I'm not saying it's not a thing, just that the above testing, even when you go a step further and correlate POI/POA for the various 5-shot groups isn't enough to convince me one way or the other. Interesting, though.

Before I get my shit jumped... Here's 100 shots of the same factory match ammo (Hornady 6mm ARC 108 ELDM). It is then broken down into 33x 3 shot groups, 20x 5 shot groups, 10x 10 shot groups, 5x 20 shot groups, and 3x 33 shot groups, with the same sequence of firing. The dots represent the average group size, and the 'wings' represent the total span of recorded group size. THIS IS WITH NO VARIABLES CHANGED-- The SAME ammo. Accuracy fixture, straight 1.25" no contour barrel, 200yd climate controlled indoor range. This also an excellent indicator to the level of trash "group size" is as a metric, but I digress... With this level of noise present in a "no" variable string, it makes a guy question what you're reading when you do change variables.

ETA: Important to note here that the 20-shot and 33-shot data is in itself small sample size data (only 3x or 5x of them), and would likely also grow a little with more testing-- however, with such large samples per test, the amount it would grow would be significantly less than 3-10 shot data sets.

ETA2.5: Okay, screwed myself with an F4 button in Excel, here's the corrected one.
View attachment 7794214

Here is the same data analyzed with mean radius and SD on individual shot radii from the MPOI. This is 2*(mean rad + 2* SD) to generate an estimate of group size. I can explain this if you'd like but all of the data I've collected has shown 4-4.5x SD + 2*MR to be pretty close to inclusive of 50+ shot group size (diminishing returns on group size growth past 50 shots)... The resulting value is for "worst case" predictions on hit probability.

View attachment 7794145

Note how much more even and expected the trend is of the averages (using more of the data from each shot, not just the 'worst' 2). Also note the wild variation that comes from trying to predict results with 3 and 5 shot groups. Wish the trend would die.

Another thing people like to try, is to average a boat load of small sample tests and say "Surely, this is as good as a single large sample test"... And you can see that the distribution obviously favors smaller group size with smaller sample size. Without a POA reference to tie multiple small sample tests together, you're operating with less data, even if the round counts are the same. Similar trends exist with ES/SD on MV.

The more you learn...

Like 10 5 shot groups vs 5 10 shot groups? If that is what you are saying, I see it in Rimfire testing a lot.

 

[Rathmatik]

That's fucking insane shit. Persecuted? lol. Literally the best thing for an "innovator" is to have his idea torn apart and examined. It is the definition of the scientific method. Push something to failure, see if it fails. If you don't want that, you are either (justifiably) scared, or selling snake oil.

The problem with this statement is that many of those that are critizing said idea have not performed any kind of scientific method. Talking about a specific product under such a lense would require doing real, measurable tests that can produce some result or conclusion. It would also be necessary to publish said results, and all testing data, in order for peers to actually make an assessment based on more than one’s word. While I agree that it’s silly to be against that, I think that is the actual problem (they aren’t doing it). People like to claim this or that about what they think something does based on their own presumed genius, without having done or referred to concrete examples.

 

[secondofangle2]

This is typical Orkan bullshit. He had made a video that is an ad hominem attack not on a single person but on ENTIRE FORUMS. I’m not wasting my time watching more that the first 5 minutes but I’ll wager he offers little in terms of specifics, it’s just an assault on the reputation of forums, perhaps with one or two examples that he then uses to generalize to all forums and try to undercut their credibility

And casual perusal of threads he’s been challenged in will recognize this intellectually immature ad hominem approach he takes.

Greg is smart. But he is intellectually immature and that is part of the reason he gets into pissing matches and alienates people.

There’s a big difference between intelligence and rationality.

 

[secondofangle2]

3:45 comparing himself to autotrickler inventor gimme a break

He “invented” flame color annealing, cleaning with CLR, tumbling with rice and heck he’s responsible for Tangent Theta.

These claims can be investigated for veracity. But while we’re at it we should check all the times he’s been wrong too.

Finally if he’s butthurt bc people don’t listen to him, maybe he should reevaluate his approach. Maybe it’s because he acts like a clown

 

[Choid]

The problem with this statement is that many of those that are critizing said idea have not performed any kind of scientific method. Talking about a specific product under such a lense would require doing real, measurable tests that can produce some result or conclusion. It would also be necessary to publish said results, and all testing data, in order for peers to actually make an assessment based on more than one’s word. While I agree that it’s silly to be against that, I think that is the actual problem (they aren’t doing it). People like to claim this or that about what they think something does based on their own presumed genius, without having done or referred to concrete examples.

Are you agreeing with me, or are you persecuting me?

 

[spife7980]

This is typical Orkan bullshit. He had made a video that is an ad hominem attack not on a single person but on ENTIRE FORUMS. I’m not wasting my time watching more that the first 5 minutes but I’ll wager he offers little in terms of specifics, it’s just an assault on the reputation of forums, perhaps with one or two examples that he then uses to generalize to all forums and try to undercut their credibility

And casual perusal of threads he’s been challenged in will recognize this intellectually immature ad hominem approach he takes.

Greg is smart. But he is intellectually immature and that is part of the reason he gets into pissing matches and alienates people.

There’s a big difference between intelligence and rationality.

Or is it that we are on page 10 of a thread titled by an asshat trying to make fun of him.

Greg is great and one of the best assets to this forum. His problem is that he engages dumb asses.

I think it looks poorly on the forum that it’s been allowed to remain for this long. I’d tell all of y’all to get fucked too. Actually I’m going to do just that.

Fuck all of you.

 

[Painless300]

Or is it that we are on page 10 of a thread titled by an asshat trying to make fun of him.

Greg is great and one of the best assets to this forum. His problem is that he engages dumb asses.

I think it looks poorly on the forum that it’s been allowed to remain for this long. I’d tell all of y’all to get fucked too. Actually I’m going to do just that.

Fuck all of you.

This is the best post in this entire thread!!!
My wife is belly laughing after I showed it to her.

 

[BigPrince]

I use a CPS, love it, and I thought the first post was hilarious.

 

[Choid]

Or is it that we are on page 10 of a thread titled by an asshat trying to make fun of him.

Greg is great and one of the best assets to this forum. His problem is that he engages dumb asses.

I think it looks poorly on the forum that it’s been allowed to remain for this long. I’d tell all of y’all to get fucked too. Actually I’m going to do just that.

Fuck all of you.

Look, he makes, and subcontracts, some really nice products. People have every right to decide whether they are a good fit for them or not.

But there is no way a grown man can make a twenty minute video about being persecuted for his genius level thinking around rifle and case cleaning and not expect people to find that a bit odd.

 

[Cascade Hemi]

Or is it that we are on page 10 of a thread titled by an asshat trying to make fun of him.

Greg is great and one of the best assets to this forum. His problem is that he engages dumb asses.

I think it looks poorly on the forum that it’s been allowed to remain for this long. I’d tell all of y’all to get fucked too. Actually I’m going to do just that.

Fuck all of you.

His video reminded me why I don't like him personally and why I won't give him my money. He's a whiner.

 

[Rocketmandb]

I think it looks poorly on the forum that it’s been allowed to remain for this long.

^^^

One bummer about this thread is that there actually is some decent discussion interspersed within a mound of shit - and every time something decent is posted, the asinine thread title floats back to the top of the forum.

I've said it before, I'll say it again: I don't know whether I'll ever get a CPS, but I do appreciate a fine example of engineering and would never begrudge anyone for buying one - and certainly not Primal Rights for designing, building, and marketing it.

Time for this thread to die a horrid death - and, shit, I just contributed to it being put back up top.

 

[Feniks Technologies]

Admittedly, I am not an expert on anything other than how to buy lots of cool reloading gear, but I actually find that when people show expertise*, they get a pretty good response. But there is a difference between how industry, and self styled experts, present things, and how enthusiasts do. The former is basically marketing their goods, and doesn't spend time discussing nuts and bolts stuff, which is fine, because it is safe for them, but you are right that it distances them from a forum of enthusiasts. On the other hand, you have guys like @Terry Cross and @MikeRTacOps who are clearly both manufacturers and enthusiasts (there are surely more,) and really spend the time interacting with people here, not asking to be seen as Gods. I mean, can you imagine either of them posting some whining bitch video about how people persecute them?

So I think you are right that forums are not necessarily the best places for manufacturers, unless you are talking a real fanboy forum. And we probably lose for that. On the other hand, is it a feature or a bug that most people here don't buy marketing speak? To me it is probably a feature. I'll take a D Thomas or a Led Zep as an expert any day, though I do think it would be awesome if we had more manufacturers who were really willing to get in depth, but I think the liability issues are probably onerous.

*The exception is, of course, the Bear Pit where being as dumb and knowledge free is a badge of honor ;-).

Thanks. While I can’t speak for Greg and won’t get into the back on forth over his video….

I will say he makes a fair point at times about forums.

I have personally scaled back and at times considered not posting because of the push back. As we learn more and have more options for testing, we constantly learn much of what we thought was gospel isn’t. And it’s hard for people to accept or even consider the possibility. But that’s just part of the deal when everyone is “equal” as far as the ability to post and reply on a forum.

I will also say that I don’t think one should be a skeptic or an optimist to get the best results. IMO, one should be neutral when it comes to things and just follow the *proper* logic.

Such as not saying “well, so and so wins, and they say this” when it comes to something that can be tested. One can use this argument when being a skeptic or an optimist.

The correct approach would be “let’s test this properly and then decide if so and so succeeds in *spite* of or *because* of this.” As there is a difference.

I could sprinkle a pinch of something neutral like graphite on top of the charge in my powder cup before dumping it in the case and go win matches.

But, I’d be winning in spite of that practice, for example.

And many people don’t like when you question the status quo.

 

[MarkyMark007]

Sunday Gunday: Glenn Kulzer Sets 8 1000-Yard Records in 2021 « Daily Bulletin

Kulzer Sets Eight New IBS 1000-Yard IBS Benchrest Records with 6 BRA Rifle Report by Alex Wheeler 2021 was a banner year for 1000-yard Benchrest. Glenn Kulzer of Dillon, Montana had a season that will go down in history. Glenn set eight IBS records in 2021 at the Deep Creek range in Missoula...

bulletin.accurateshooter.com

He seats the primers by feel using a relatively inexpensive primer seating tool — nothing fancy.

 

[Feniks Technologies]

Sunday Gunday: Glenn Kulzer Sets 8 1000-Yard Records in 2021 « Daily Bulletin

Kulzer Sets Eight New IBS 1000-Yard IBS Benchrest Records with 6 BRA Rifle Report by Alex Wheeler 2021 was a banner year for 1000-yard Benchrest. Glenn Kulzer of Dillon, Montana had a season that will go down in history. Glenn set eight IBS records in 2021 at the Deep Creek range in Missoula...

bulletin.accurateshooter.com

If you watch the video, he also says he seats until bottomed, and then a little more. Which is crush.

He also weight sorts his primers.

Don’t just pick and choose what parts to use to support your opinion.

 

[37L1]

It's like a lot of things that you learn while growing up. You sort through the BS/whining and take away what you choose. Sometimes we throw the baby out with the bathwater just because we don't appreciate the deliverer or the delivery or the message goes against all of our preconceived notions. Or we don't ask questions or present new ideas because we are insecure. Egos can be fragile, can't they?

Who wins, who loses, who learns and who doesn't?

 

[BuildingConceptsllc]

If you watch the video, he also says he seats until bottomed, and then a little more. Which is crush.

He also weight sorts his primers.

Don’t just pick and choose what parts to use to support your opinion.

Then he's basically controlling his primer seating depth then, just doing it a different way.