• 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!

Which Group Is Better .., why do you think so??

Muttt

Muttt

Sergeant
Full Member
Minuteman
Jun 3, 2010
658
1
56
Washington, Kitsap County.
www.combatveterans.com
I put numbers on them to make it easier. I have already decided which groups I like best. Just wondered what other thought.

I was try to find a factory load my rifle likes to eat and found that it really really likes factory Match Grade 168gr AMAX. So, I decided to pick up some AMAX and load them into my brass and see if I can roll my own and have them compare to the factory loads. I used some AA2520 that I had on had and came up with the following results.


I numbered the targets to make it easier to pick out which one you like best. There are 8 five shot groups. I started at 40gr and worked them up to 43.5gr using .5gr increments.

target35.jpg


 
Re: Which Group Is Better???

I would suggest trying increments of .2gr instead of .5gr as you may miss a node that shoots "lights out".

Maybe work around one of your better group charge weights and narrow it down from there.
 
Re: Which Group Is Better???

Yeah I know. I was just roughing it out.

I like #1 the best, but 2,3 and 4 aren't bad either. Now that I shot it at .5 increments and saw how badly the accuracy drops off after 41.5 I can tweak things even further by doing it in .2 increments. I was really suprised at how the accuracy dropped of the higher the loads went. I've always heard the opposite from most reloaders.

Next I'll load 40.0, .2, .4, .6 etc .... but I don't have to bother with anything higher than 41.5. That's my master plan anyway.

I still think groups #2 was from my shooting and not from the loading. The first shot was high, the next three were in one "bug hole" and the last one was low. I kinda felt that I pulled that last shot.
 
Re: Which Group Is Better???

I would say that group #4 is where I would look for a place to fine-tune from. All your other groups show some to a lot of vertical spread. The horizontal spread in #4 is of no concern here. Go to finer increments of .2 or.3 grains above and below the 41.5 of target 4 and see where that leads you.
Ideally, you are looking for the least vertical at the highest safe velocity. Additional fine tuning can be done with different seating depths, once you find the node and velocity you need/like.

Paul
 
Re: Which Group Is Better???

Potentially #4; it has the least amount of vertical. What were the conditions when you shot it?

Jeffvn
 
Re: Which Group Is Better???

I'd try 40.2, 40.4, 40.6 because #2 does look more like you pulled those than the load and it appeared to be coming together. Might test around #4 some as well.
 
Re: Which Group Is Better???

It was cold and clear. There was a slight breeze (don't know the actaul MPH). Although it was cold, it was a nice day to shoot. I'd say the wind had a little play in small amount of vertical stringing. But, it wasn't blowing or anything like that.

I just loaded up another 20 for my next trip 40.0, .2, .4, .6, .8, 41.0, .2, .4, .6, .8 I'll be shooting 4 shot groups next time out. But, that should be enough to tell.
 
Re: Which Group Is Better???

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Muttt</div><div class="ubbcode-body">So, what is the difference with vertical and horizontal stringing. Have only been loading a couple years and still learnin. </div></div>

Horizontal is condition related. Vertical is the load but problems with shooting technique and trigger control will also show up in these.
 
Re: Which Group Is Better???

Yep .... might be in a week or so. But, can always resurrect this thread. I tried to get some load data from other people using AA2520. But, I'm starting to think I'm the only one. I'm using it cause I load it in my Grendel and since I've got several pounds on hand .... well.
 
Re: Which Group Is Better???

+1 horizontal stringing tends to be conditions related and vertical load-related. But if you get sloppy with your trigger pull, you can induce some horizontal stringing.

Jeffvn
 
Re: Which Group Is Better???

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Jeffvn</div><div class="ubbcode-body">+1 horizontal stringing tends to be conditions related and vertical load-related. But if you get sloppy with your trigger pull, you can induce some horizontal stringing.

Jeffvn </div></div>

Varience in muzzle velocity is what gives vertical spread more notariety as being load related...but taken to the pure ballistics, a load can spread equally in any direction.

I'm not arguing what "tool" USUALLY fixes what symptom...but it is erroneous to assume a horizontal line is better than a vertical line.

I would personally ask first and foremost.... did you track which shots did what? You may find that either the first or last shot account for your single wide fliers. In which case you discover a TOTALLY different outcome.
 
Re: Which Group Is Better???

I completely agree. If I have four that are in a cloverleaf and the fifth is out there somewhere, I'm more inclined to call that one shooter error. I'm not locked down or anything. Just shootin off the bench with a bipod.

The #1 target has the smallest overall group and the tightest grouping. I think the flyer was the cold bore shot.

Well find out either tomorrow or the next day. Depending on weather. It started snowing here. I've already got the rounds loaded up in .2gr increments. Gonna run the 40 through 41.8 again and see which ones do good. I may even do the OCW ladder test after that just for shits and grins. Multiple tests for the same thing can only provide better data.

Would everyone agree that targets 5,6,7, and 8 seemed to fall off at an equal rate and the shots opened up at about that same rate??
 
Re: Which Group Is Better???

I would say group four. Wind or trigger control are the likely culprits on the horizontal spread. He doesnt have a lot of vertical spread anywhere, so as stated, the load with the least vertical is probably the most consistent.

A chronograph would tell us more and would not be influenced by trigger control issues.

Rich
 
Re: Which Group Is Better???

I'm a little puzzled by the point of impact, with more powder? Normally, we would see the heavier charge print a little higher on the target? #1 or #4 are about the same, as far as I'm concerned, as far as accuracy. I don't think we can diagnose a single group as far as vertical or horizontal. Needs more work. Need to sandbag that puppy and eliminate the quirks, also, useful suggestion to number the rounds on a notepad as you fire them. I always do, during load development. I don't want to have to guess which round, the first or the last is the flier. BB
 
Re: Which Group Is Better???

Thanks. What does ATC mean?


I'll number the rounds as I fire them next time. More information can't hurt.

I was puzzled by the way the heavier loads dropped. They started high, then worked their way to the bullseye on #4 and then steadily dropped after that. Not sure why. Hoping someone else could explain it to me.

Our range has a shooting rest you can borrow. I'm gonna use that with the next batch I fire. I'm also going to clean it and then run a few fouling shoots for the next trip.
 
Re: Which Group Is Better???

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
I was puzzled by the way the heavier loads dropped. They started high, then worked their way to the bullseye on #4 and then steadily dropped after that. Not sure why. Hoping someone else could explain it to me.
</div></div>

The barrel wips as the shot is fired. Bullets with different muzzle velocities leave the barrel at different point along the period of oscillation. This is the whole reason for working up loads: to find a load that results in shot velocity variation that combines in a way to minimize error, rather than increase it (this is a really complicated subject and better left for another time...) Perhaps the faster loadings are leaving the barrel at a point in the wip when the barrel is pointing lower...

Here's a page that simulates the modes of vibration of the barrel (to help you visualize what's going on):
www.varmintal.com/amode.htm
 
Re: Which Group Is Better???

It's called harmonics and does not explain the change in impact, as observed, in this case. Varmint Al is an old friend of mine. I'm sure he didn't intend to say that all the drop we see was due to the different vibrations resulting from barrel whip. BB
 
Re: Which Group Is Better???

Barrel harmonics are not as easily explained as a simple single plane up and down motion; if that were the case, then a good shooter would ONLY see vertical dispersion on a good condition day, with a "bad" load.

Barrel harmonics cause the muzzle to oscillate in some manner of a circular pattern, the degree of which is determined by the pressure curve of the load, which explains flyers that are not exactly in a perfect vertical line in relation to POA, or open groups that may be "round" in shape but not tight.
 
Re: Which Group Is Better???

I've read about the concept and (basically) understand how it works. I suppose if I used a powder that had more of a range like 40gr to 48gr instead of the 40gr (min) to 44gr (max) that the AA2520 has I might see my groups move back up the targets (like in targets 1-4). Or am I way off base here?


I'm still trying to figure out what ATC stands for in the target group measurements.
 
Re: Which Group Is Better???

In other words, Mcguyver is barking up the wrong tree. Barrel harmonics is always present, to some degree, but the difference in point of impact shown is due to something else.

Is it possible that you mistakenly fired these rounds in reverse order? In other words, the first group marked as having 41.0 grains of 2520 is really 43.5? Just sayin'
 
Re: Which Group Is Better???

Or the barrel become hotter or dirtier or your body position changed causing you to form a different site picture.
 
Re: Which Group Is Better???

ATC is the "Average To Center" also known as the Mean Radius (MR). It's a method for measuring group size which better discounts potential fliers and when not using a V-block, solid rest with an accuracy barrel, helps eliminate shooter error. The math isn't as hard as it might sound, but it's definitely not as easy as taking the Extreme Spread (ES) or Vertical Dispersion (VD).

If you're looking for ammunition performance without shooter induced error, I recommend looking into MR method of measurement.

That said, group #1 and #4 are the best, IMHO. #3 would be in there too, except that you can't discount the vertical stringing which could be directly related to velocity standard deviation due to the loading.
 
Re: Which Group Is Better ..... why do you think so???

Without seeing the added post with the measurements, I would say 1 and 4 are the two best choices. 1 is the best, but 4 is not too bad assuming the spread left and right is caused by wind.

You might want to also try another powder to see if you get better results. I tried RL-15 and various Hodgden powders before settling on Varget for my .308 155gr AMax loads. I get less than 1/8" vertical spread with that load.

My ideas behind picking a best group is more vertical that horizontal. Left/Right movement is usually either wind or human error, where up down is likely a harmonics issue with the barrel/powder charge interactions. My $.02
 
Re: Which Group Is Better ..... why do you think so???

You guys are reading more into my post than what I intended. The POI of the bullet is a function (among several other things) of the POA at the moment which the bullet leaves the barrel. And the POA itself is a function of the displacement, velocity and angle of the muzzle of the barrel at that instant. Since the dynamic motion of the barrel is very time dependent, and your load groups are leaving the barrel at different times from each other (due to different velocities) therefore I was just speculating that those three factors (displacement, velocity and angle) could have combined to form a lower POI on the target. But this is just speculation.
 
Re: Which Group Is Better ..... why do you think so???

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: McGuyver</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You guys are reading more into my post than what I intended. The POI of the bullet is a function (among other things) of the POA at the moment which the bullet leaves the barrel. And the POA itself is a function of the displacement, velocity and angle of the muzzle of the barrel at that instant. Since the dynamic motion of the barrel is very time dependent, and your load groups are leaving the barrel at different times from each other (due to different velocities) therefore I was just speculating that those three factors (displacement, velocity and angle) could have combined to form a lower POI on the target. But this is just speculation. </div></div>

No way, not that much drop, with fairly decent groups, and in fairly consistent increments. No offense to the OP but my money is with the guy that mentioned the loads might have been shot in reverse order from what was intended. That's an EASY mistake to make. I code my primers with a sharpie so I don't get mixed up during testing. Little marks identifying what's the same load, corrosponding with the same mark in the notebook with the load weight written next to it. A "dot", a "line", an "x", a "circle", all colored in, half colored in, etc. Hell, even numbers work if you can write that small with a sharpie, I don't like writing on the brass, but that works too.

Anything to ensure the right load is getting put on the right target. Had an open box tip over and dump the loads several decades ago when I started reloading, been marking them ever since.
 
Re: Which Group Is Better ..... why do you think so???

The Difference between 41g and 42g is not enough powder to cause that much drop at 100yd by itself...but you know, any time the data is questionable go do it again.

PERSONALLY i think you're wasting your time with any analysis of WHERE the grouping impacted the target at this stage. You'll only get caught up in an endless debate over harmonics and loads and ....ugghhh when in reality they are BOTH contributing to the unexplained varience and not worth analyzing yet. Your job right now is to find the load that groups BEST AND IGNORE WHERE THE GROUP IS.

ALSO...you're hand loading so ignore all that "vertical spread due to load" nonsense! That's factory load analysis. If you hand loaded clean cases and precisely measured each load then the spread is only a matter of how well the rifle and bullet perform together (UNLESS your using so much powder that you're only getting a partial burn in the barrel causing inconsistent velocity regardless of how accurately you measure)
**oh inconsistent velocity could also be not enough powder to get a consistent seal on the chamber.***

1. Reload more rounds
2. Re-test but use a chrono if possible
3. Re-examine
4. keep us posted

 
Re: Which Group Is Better ..... why do you think so???

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: wbeard</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Your job right now is to find the load that groups BEST AND IGNORE WHERE THE GROUP IS.

</div></div>

I'll politely beg to differ with that statement as a full blown contradiction of the OCW load principles....which is a valid load development method, whether the OP is implementing it or not.
 
Re: Which Group Is Better ..... why do you think so???

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Tripwire</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: McGuyver</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You guys are reading more into my post than what I intended. The POI of the bullet is a function (among other things) of the POA at the moment which the bullet leaves the barrel. And the POA itself is a function of the displacement, velocity and angle of the muzzle of the barrel at that instant. Since the dynamic motion of the barrel is very time dependent, and your load groups are leaving the barrel at different times from each other (due to different velocities) therefore I was just speculating that those three factors (displacement, velocity and angle) could have combined to form a lower POI on the target. But this is just speculation. </div></div>

No way, not that much drop, with fairly decent groups, and in fairly consistent increments. No offense to the OP but my money is with the guy that mentioned the loads might have been shot in reverse order from what was intended. That's an EASY mistake to make. I code my primers with a sharpie so I don't get mixed up during testing. Little marks identifying what's the same load, corrosponding with the same mark in the notebook with the load weight written next to it. A "dot", a "line", an "x", a "circle", all colored in, half colored in, etc. Hell, even numbers work if you can write that small with a sharpie, I don't like writing on the brass, but that works too.

Anything to ensure the right load is getting put on the right target. Had an open box tip over and dump the loads several decades ago when I started reloading, been marking them ever since. </div></div>

Reversed order of shooting is not the answer. Based on QuickLOAD data, the difference in muzzle velocities to be expected when going from 40 to 43.5 grains of AA2520 is almost exactly 200 fps. If you load up the resulting muzzle velocities in any ballistics program you will see that the difference in drop at 100 yards is about 0.4"!!

It is hard to tell what the overall change in drop is from the target pictures, but it surely is a hell of a lot more than 0.4". It looks to be something more like 5".

On the other hand, lets assume that the muzzle velocity achieved from the 40.0 grain load resulted in the bullet leaving the barrel at the extreme top of its three dimensional whipping cycle. Lets also assume that the 43.5 grain load resulted in the bullet leaving the barrel at the extreme bottom of its whipping cycle (not likely because it should result in a fairly tight group if there are no shooter errors to contend with). What total difference in muzzle position due to whip would be required to achieve a 5" drop in point of impact? -- about 1/30th of an inch. In other words, the barrel tip would have to be whipping upward and downward by 1/60" of an inch. Have you seen the popular slow motion video where you can actually see barrel whipping taking place with the naked eye once the film is slowed down enough? Obviously, this phenominon is seen more frequently and readily with relative light (Sporter) weight barrels since their whip is more pronounced.

My guess is that there is more than one thing going on here, but accidental reversal of the order for firing is not the cause. Even if it were the OP had made this mistale, it would only explain a small fraction of the mean POI shift shown on paper. Barrel whip is a more likely contributer and the extent of its contribution to the overall difference depends on how heavy the barrel is.
 
Re: Which Group Is Better ..... why do you think so???

Sorry, I don't buy into the whole "barrel whip" shit as presented here. Have done more than my fair share of load developement over the past 30 years, and with all kinds of barrel contours and lengths, and have never ever run across what this guy had done on this thread.

Somethings are constant as far as I'm concerned....increase the charge weight and impacts rise; whatever barrel whip or harmonics, or whatever you want to call it, is present produces either a scattered group, or an accurate group, but nothing like the dispersion seen here.

All one has to do is shoot the upper third of a load parameter in .1 or .2 grain increments, all else equal, to see two distinct accuracy nodes and the corrosponding scatter nodes, but nothing anywhere close to representing what we have here.

I've read somewhere, and can't remember where, that "barrel whip" as it's being presented in this context, is a function of recoil which is entirely seperate from barrel harmonics, and the videos prove it. Harmonics happen before the bullet leaves the muzzle during its travel down the bore, as in Chris Long's P wave theory, which directly relates to the OCW principles; and recoil is created when the bullet leaves the muzzle having little effect on actual bullet flight beyond the human errors of "flinch" and "shot anticipation". The high speed video I've seen clearly shows a muzzle flash, as in escaping gas and bullet exit, way before the barrel actually "whips".
 
Re: Which Group Is Better ..... why do you think so???

Kee ryst, people! These pointy head explanations are causing me to get the vapors! Especially bows~. My theory is implausible, but his defies logic?

I don't know what is causing such a change in point of impact, and say so. I merely ask the question. I agree with only a small part of his reply... never mind, the whole post is caca. Fair warning; I'm only open to reasonably intelligent suggestions. (no offense) BB

edit: at this point, we need mutt to get back in here and follow instructions: you need to replicate your loads and we need a DO OVER. If it's valid, the data will support it. If not, your credibility is in question. We anxiously await the results, so be quick about it, please!

 
Re: Which Group Is Better ..... why do you think so???

OK, There is a fair amount of speculation here.

The barrel is not a sporter. I am shooting a 20" bull barrel on a stock Remington 700 SPS Tactical.


I weighed and loaded every round. I placed my groups of five rounds in ziplock sandwich bags with a paper card listing the charge weight immediately after loading them, leaving not oportunity for mixing up loaded rounds. I shot these in order and did not shoot them in reverse order. Since I was loading from min to max, I wanted to check my brass for pressure signs between groups so I placed the brass from each group back into the same bag that it was taken from. So, there was double verification of the charge weight. I put alot of effort into making sure I new which ammo had which charge weight, so I could use that information to load for accuracy in future loads.

I am anxious to get back in there myself. The weather here has been windy and snowing. As much as a want to test my next batch, it does not good to toss them down range on a crappy windy day. I'm waiting for the weather to calm down a little bit. I don't mind shooting in the rain, snow and cold, I just don't want to fight the wind while doing workups. Even though I am shooting some of the same loads, the test will be slightly different for two reasons. 1. Instead of loading in .5gr incremements, this time it will be .2gr incremements. 2. I am only loading for 40.0, .2, .4, .6, .8, 41.0, .2, .4, .6 and .8 grains. Since targets 1-4 had the better groups, there is no reason for me to reshoot the loads on targets 5-8. I really didn't like any of those groups. So, although the test targets should be similar, they will be slightly different than my first go around because of the changes I've made.

And, lastly, I want to make sure that accuracy wasn't falling off because of a dirty rifle, so I did a thurough cleaning last night and will be starting with a clean barrel (with fouling shots) next time around. While cleaning, I took off my scope (Warne Tactical quick release rings) to allow easier cleaning. When I did, I noticed that the rear mount wasn't "as tight" as it should have been. It wasn't loose or anything, it was still pretty snug, but not as tight as I normally keep them. The front was still very tight. Was it enough to make my groups drop?? Who knows. But it was worth mentioning since it is possible it could have allowed the scope to dip (although I don't think it was loose enough for that).

 
Re: Which Group Is Better ..... why do you think so???

Well, that was going to be my next question, check the scope and then check your action screws? That is a big difference in point of impact and you are the only one that can really shed some light on it. Understand, shooting a different bullet can move the point of impact but a good quality barrel will drop them all in, reasonably close. BB
 
Re: Which Group Is Better ..... why do you think so???

Example: this is with different loads. 22/243Middlested 62 grain Berger. Not much difference. BB

2012_0117AA.jpg
 
Re: Which Group Is Better ..... why do you think so???

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BuzzBoss915</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Example: this is with different loads. 22/243Middlested 62 grain Berger. Not much difference. BB

2012_0117AA.jpg
</div></div>

That's easy to explain. You have a very good load there by OCW principles, with the typical one grain of tolerance (accuracy node) that I normally find in my load work up. You just got lucky with simple round numbers. I always end up with .3 or .8 or something like that. Rare is .5 or .0. How far +/- does it go for that node. Is 42.0 and 43.0 it?

I certainly hope you load the middle of that with 42.5 grains..........
 
Re: Which Group Is Better ..... why do you think so???

My point is, without any change in his elevation or windage turrets, just a different amount of the same powder; it is hard for me to believe the difference in impact. It almost has to be mechanical, if he didn't make a mistake in recording his data?

Mutt, how about humoring me? Just two loads: 40.0 and 43.5. I want to see them group in the same place as previous, and then I'll shut up. 1.5" high, @ 12 o'clock and 4" low, at 6:30. BB
 
Re: Which Group Is Better ..... why do you think so???

OK,

I couldn't stand sitting here any longer so I decided to load up and go to the range. It actually worked out since the snow stopped and the wind dropped off completely. So, I figured I'd load up some more rounds.

Brass - FC once fired brass, FL sized, trimmed, beveled/chamfered, uniformed primer pockets inside and out, cleaned with stainless steel media.

Primer - CCI

Powder - AA 2520, Min 40.0 Max 44.0, loaded four rounds at 40.0, .2, .4, .6, .8, 41.0, .2, .4, .6, .8, 42.0, .2, .4, .6, .8, loaded a total of 60 rounds.

Bullet - Hornady 168gr AMAX

Rifle - 20" Remington 700 SPS Tactical .308, B&C Tactical Medalist A2 stock, X-mark pro trigger, Vortex Crossfire 6-24 x 50 scope, Warne Tactical tall rings, EGW 20 MOA scope base.

Range - 100 yard outdoor range, plywood target back @ 100 yards, wooden shooting bench, adjustable shooting rest

Condiitons - Light snow flurries, 33 degrees

Wind - no apperant wind, 0 mph

Elevation - 50 feet above see level


Here's a pic of the range ...........

2012-01-17_13-39-32_944.jpg




Here is a pic of how I had my ammo loaded, and labeled to avoid confusion ...........

2012-01-17_13-39-46_876.jpg




My range has a small shooting rest they will let you borrow. I used it to take as much of "ME" out of the equation as I can ......

2012-01-17_13-39-56_356.jpg




Here is the results of my latest test group. Each group was four shots. The first group was top left and went in order to the right. Then down to the next row and left to right. Each group is labled with the group number and the powder charge used for that group. Each labeled group of rounds was double checked for powder charge before loading and shooting. There were a couple of called flyers and are labeled as such on the target (target 2 and 9, only 3 shots were fired at target 13). Three groups in a row were shot with a 5 minute interval between groups. After each row of three groups were shot, the barrel was allowed to cool for 15 minutes.


2012-01-17_16-28-30_808.jpg



As you can see, the same thing happened with this test group as with the other test groups. The hotter the load, the lower it got. I checked the scope rings before shooting an after each 4 shot group to ensure it was tight. The scope rings had no effect on the groups. The action screws were also checked for tightness before shooting and after the test. The action screws also had no effect on the groups.

Same question, which group is better and why do you think so?? I'm shooting to see which load works best in this rifle. Once I decide on a load, I'll rezero to that load and then shoot for the smallest group with all the rounds loaded to the same load.

For those that might ask "why didn't you load 43.0, .2, .4 etc ...." All I had left was 60 AMAX bullets. The local shop was out and I could only load 60 rounds.








 
Re: Which Group Is Better ..... why do you think so???

Kinda reinforces the original groups 1 & 4 doesn't it?

It looks like it was starting to close up again at target 15, but unless you need the extra velocity, I'd start loading at 40.2 and not look back.

Have fun!
 
Re: Which Group Is Better ..... why do you think so???

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Tripwire</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: wbeard</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Your job right now is to find the load that groups BEST AND IGNORE WHERE THE GROUP IS.

</div></div>

I'll politely beg to differ with that statement as a full blown contradiction of the OCW load principles....which is a valid load development method, whether the OP is implementing it or not. </div></div>

We can debate OCW on another thread...Personally it's fundamentally flawed from the get go as many of my MOST accurate loads are closer to the min. load density and I'm not a speed freak that's always pushing the top end of my pressures. Plus there's Equal following to the school of thought that rifles have a favorite seating depth regardless of load and that should be sought before worrying about powder or charge....which is opposite of OCW. I'M NOT KNOCKING OCW!!! Just presenting that it's not the single way in the universe to get great loads.


About this thread though--
I didn't know you were shooting a 20" barrel!!! I would naturally wonder if you getting a complete burn and the excess powder wasn't actually resulting in slower mv's (smothering effect)
Just curious.
 
Re: Which Group Is Better ..... why do you think so???

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: wbeard</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Tripwire</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: wbeard</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Your job right now is to find the load that groups BEST AND IGNORE WHERE THE GROUP IS.

</div></div>

I'll politely beg to differ with that statement as a full blown contradiction of the OCW load principles....which is a valid load development method, whether the OP is implementing it or not. </div></div>

We can debate OCW on another thread...Personally it's fundamentally flawed from the get go as many of my MOST accurate loads are closer to the min. load density and I'm not a speed freak that's always pushing the top end of my pressures. Plus there's Equal following to the school of thought that rifles have a favorite seating depth regardless of load and that should be sought before worrying about powder or charge....which is opposite of OCW. I'M NOT KNOCKING OCW!!! Just presenting that it's not the single way in the universe to get great loads.


About this thread though--
I didn't know you were shooting a 20" barrel!!! I would naturally wonder if you getting a complete burn and the excess powder wasn't actually resulting in slower mv's (smothering effect)
Just curious. </div></div>

At 100 yards, the additional drop caused by lost velocity won't cause that large an impact -- even if the 'smothering effect' theory has merit.
 
Re: Which Group Is Better ..... why do you think so???

What would doing an OCW ladder test tell me that these two test groups hadn't told me?

I'm not knocking OCW, it makes sense. But, would the results be the same as I've already gotten here?
 
Re: Which Group Is Better ..... why do you think so???

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: wbeard</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Personally it's fundamentally flawed from the get go as many of my MOST accurate loads are closer to the min. load density and I'm not a speed freak that's always pushing the top end of my pressures. Plus there's Equal following to the school of thought that rifles have a favorite seating depth regardless of load and that should be sought before worrying about powder or charge....which is opposite of OCW. I'M NOT KNOCKING OCW!!! Just presenting that it's not the single way in the universe to get great loads.
</div></div>

Per load density: it's got nothing to do with OCW, and if you'd like to discuss that with Dan Newberry himself, I can hook you up. I personally seek out a load density that's as close to 100% as possible without compressing loads, but that's just the way I do it. Again, nothing at all to do with how OCW addresses barrel harmonics. Can't know where you came up with that. OCW is a good way to AVOID pushing a pressure limit, in more ways than one, such as developing a load that's universal between ambiant temperature differences. It's a shame you don't fully understand it as evident by your opinion of it.

Per seating depth: It's one of the most misunderstood aspects to reloading there is. Just look at some of the threads that pop up here. Most have mag box restraints to contend with that govern the seating depth, not to mention way too long throats, neither of which are generally conducive to what the rifle may "like". OCW suggests working up the load first, then fine tuning the load with seating depth, and there's solid physics behind that....and if you want to understand the exact function of seating depth in the OCW principles, then PM me, or talk to Dan himself, since apparently it's not appropriate for you here.

Never said it's the single way to develope a load, but for those who can understand it, and implement it, it's the sensible way to go.
 
Re: Which Group Is Better ..... why do you think so???

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Muttt</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What would doing an OCW ladder test tell me that these two test groups hadn't told me?

I'm not knocking OCW, it makes sense. But, would the results be the same as I've already gotten here? </div></div>

You have something between 1,2,3, and 4, shooter error on 4.

5,6, and 7 are a scatter node.

8,9, and 10 are decent, shooter error on 9.....11 and up are starting to scatter again.

I'd retest those two areas, but I'd personally just concentrate on the higher node and eventually pick a middle powder weight, and try very small seating depth changes to tighten up the group. I'd also shoot any further testing "round robin" from a clean barrel to spread the effects of fouling over the entire range of results.

Are you shooting free recoil with that rifle?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
Why is the 6mm Dasher so popular?
Replies
17
Views
628
BoilerUP
BoilerUP
locash78
OWC without chronograph?
Replies
7
Views
400
locash78
locash78
ZA206
77 TMK + XBR + varying brass testing…
Replies
0
Views
137
ZA206
ZA206
Cole440
Starting Load Workup With Factory Ammo?
Replies
39
Views
709
Cole440
Cole440
K
Ogive length or base to tip?
Replies
6
Views
200
kyotekiller25
K
Top Bottom
Back