Large group size

Joefrazell said:

That's kinda the point though. That first group could have easily been the last group and I'd of thought I had a load that I didn't. I also think it's good to point out that out of these 17 shots there were 4 groups of 3 shots that were under half minute. Also, if I'd of stopped shooting I wouldn't consider this load. Truth is 17 shots for 1.5 min. Is actually pretty good.

Click to expand...

I once fired a fourteen shot group at 100 yards with a model 34 Remington.22 long rifle with a 24" barrel of 7/8". I used that rifle to kill sqeeks. When I got back home I took it to the range to see how good it was. That's all the ammo I had left.

Let's say you have an honest .7 MOA gun. In other words if the gun is held perfect every time. Your 17 shots went to 1.4 a difference of .7 or .35 per side. Now think about how minor of a change in hold it takes to cause your POI to move .35 inches @ 100 yards and how difficult it is to do something exactly the same 17 times in a row.

RichCoyle said:

model 34 Remington.22 long rifle with a 24" barrel of 7/8". I used that rifle to kill sqeeks.

Click to expand...

You're a braver man than I am. If I was hunting anything with a name like that I'd be using at least a .45-70 or some form of a dangerous game rifle!

This supports my argument that starting load development with 3 shot groups is perfectly reasonable... if the first 3 are unacceptable, the next 2, 7, 17 or 27 are not going to make it any smaller

Monteria said:

This supports my argument that starting load development with 3 shot groups is perfectly reasonable... if the first 3 are unacceptable, the next 2, 7, 17 or 27 are not going to make it any smaller

Click to expand...

I think you're missing the point. The point is as far as bullet on target dispersion that this is a perfectly acceptable load. Even for moderate long range hunting. Now if you threw this load out and went with one that "shot better" based off a 3 or 5 shot group your likely going to have a false sense of reality of what the rifle will actually do and potentially even a worse "load".

Then one day you'll be out at the range and your .5" all day long load that you thought you had shoots a 1.2" three shot group and you get all flustered and start questioning everything. Instead of just acknowledging that your initial sample sizes were just too small.

med358-boise said:

Let's say you have an honest .7 MOA gun. In other words if the gun is held perfect every time. Your 17 shots went to 1.4 a difference of .7 or .35 per side. Now think about how minor of a change in hold it takes to cause your POI to move .35 inches @ 100 yards and how difficult it is to do something exactly the same 17 times in a row.

Click to expand...

I'd say my wobble that day was right around .3-.5 moa. This doesn't account for anything but wobble zone though. Rear bad not being completely square is where this can fall apart. Gotta make sure things are all square.

Joefrazell said:

I think you're missing the point. The point is as far as bullet on target dispersion that this is a perfectly acceptable load. Even for moderate long range hunting. Now if you threw this load out and went with one that "shot better" based off a 3 or 5 shot group your likely going to have a false sense of reality of what the rifle will actually do and potentially even a worse "load".

Then one day you'll be out at the range and your .5" all day long load that you thought you had shoots a 1.2" three shot group and you get all flustered and start questioning everything. Instead of just acknowledging that your initial sample sizes were just too small.

Click to expand...

I never said what was acceptable, what I would consider acceptable, or that your group was unacceptable. Nor did I say not to progress to larger sample sizes. In fact, I said START with 3 shot groups...

I've still never seen a 5 shot group get any smaller than the first 3, so I stand by the statement.

If the first 3 are an unacceptable dispersion, regardless of what is acceptable, no number of additional rounds will make it acceptable.

Joefrazell said:

I'd say my wobble that day was right around .3-.5 moa. This doesn't account for anything but wobble zone though. Rear bad not being completely square is where this can fall apart. Gotta make sure things are all square.

Click to expand...

True, but if it wasn't clear from my previous post, I think you are shooting pretty dang good.

Monteria said:

I never said what was acceptable, what I would consider acceptable, or that your group was unacceptable. Nor did I say not to progress to larger sample sizes. In fact, I said START with 3 shot groups...

I've still never seen a 5 shot group get any smaller than the first 3, so I stand by the statement.

If the first 3 are an unacceptable dispersion, regardless of what is acceptable, no number of additional rounds will make it acceptable.

Click to expand...

Sure, I guess if you have a standard that you are looking for and the group is over that standard it's time to move on. Sorry, I didn't mean to offend you if I have. That was not the intention here. I agree with what you're saying. I've been there before. I just have a hard time with three shot groups now because I've seen myself chase my tail too many times. It's usually with a rifle that doesn't want to shoot. Now days I do exactly what I did here. If this load wasn't acceptable to me I'd completely change the load. Either adding a significant amount of powder or changing a component and that would usually be powder first. Too me "tuning" a load just doesn't work long term. You might be able to get better velocity es's but as far as pure precision It doesnt seem to make a difference for me to change seating depth, small powder charge increments ect. Most of those are anecdotal and they don't repeat. But for me to proof a load combo it needs a group of at least 20 shots with the same poa and I feel if most guys that shoot three shot groups would just switch to 20 they would find that they've waisted a lot of components and time.

Even tuners. They do work but ive noticed they're not consistent day to day. Gotta move them around. Again, this is just what I've found that works for me.

med358-boise said:

True, but if it wasn't clear from my previous post, I think you are shooting pretty dang good.

Click to expand...

Thank you. Im doing my best haha. This things a lot too handle but I'm happy with the results of this load. I think I'm gunna try some 215's next.

Not offended. I hope I didn't offend you. And I agree with everything you post thereafter. Except the first component to switch... I normally switch bullet first. Even when I've been blinded by wanting so badly for a particular bullet to work, and burned pounds of powder trying to make it, if a barrel doesn't like it it's just not going to.

Case in point... 300PRC with 225ELDMs. Some 3 shot groups seemed acceptable. Never could get an acceptable 10 shot. Switched to 215 Bergers and every powder worked.

7PRC with 180eldms, same thing. 180 bergers just plain shoot more consistently.

At least I have 2, 6.5s that like the 123 and 140 eldmurders...

That said, I don't do small increments either. I do development, but many would consider it much too course. For my purpose, it's either going to shoot, or it's not.

How did I get this far off subject? It must be my once every couple years snow day.

Monteria said:

Not offended. I hope I didn't offend you. And I agree with everything you post thereafter. Except the first component to switch... I normally switch bullet first. Even when I've been blinded by wanting so badly for a particular bullet to work, and burned pounds of powder trying to make it, if a barrel doesn't like it it's just not going to.

Case in point... 300PRC with 225ELDMs. Some 3 shot groups seemed acceptable. Never could get an acceptable 10 shot. Switched to 215 Bergers and every powder worked.

7PRC with 180eldms, same thing. 180 bergers just plain shoot more consistently.

At least I have 2, 6.5s that like the 123 and 140 eldmurders...

That said, I don't do small increments either. I do development, but many would consider it much too course. For my purpose, it's either going to shoot, or it's not.

How did I get this far off subject? It must be my once every couple years snow day.

Click to expand...

I've found the exact same. 225's didn't shoot
Well. 180eldms shot really really good sometimes and not great other times. 147 eldm's are so accurate it's scary in my experience with the barrels I've tried them in.

Bergers just are more consistently accurate overall. Except for the 6.5 stuff. Never actually tried one in any 6.5. 147's are cheap, accurate and devastating on tissue.

Monteria said:

This supports my argument that starting load development with 3 shot groups is perfectly reasonable... if the first 3 are unacceptable, the next 2, 7, 17 or 27 are not going to make it any smaller

Click to expand...

AGREE with this ^^^,. somewhat,..
I use, 5 Shot group's, when Testing Ammo / Rifle accuracy and IF NOT a "Good" group,.. I "scrap" the Load and "Move On" to,.. longer COAL's, more "Jump" or, More Powder, etc.. After, a couple of "Good" 5 shot group's I move load Out to, 200 yds and Shoot,.. 10 Shots, Min.
If under, 1 MOA,.. I'm Done Testing for, that, "Hunting" Rifle !
1/2 MOA on, My 6 XC Target / Varmint, Custom, Rifle ( That's, One inch or, better at, 200 Yds ).
My semi Custom Rem. 700, in 6 XC has produced, MANY, One Hole, 5 shot, "Wallet Groups" in the LOW 2's to 3's at,.. 100 Yds.
"Proofing" 10 shot, Loads at, 200 or, 300 Yards,.. is the "REAL accuracy Test" for, Me !
If, my Old .338 Win Mag., FLINCH shows Up,. I allow for,. THAT once in, a while,.. LOL !
If, 4 Shots in, One Hole and One off, a 1/2 an inch or so,. I'll,.. re-Test, that, Load

Agreed. Consistancy seemed to be my issue with them. For the BC and low velocity terminal performance, I wanted them to work so bad that I burned 200 of each before switching. Heck, i even tried 162eldms in the 7prc, but they were so bad that I gave them up after 9 rounds. Switched to burgers and had consistent and accurate loads in 50 rounds or less, then high volume confirmation proved them.

I dont know why the 6.5s are an exception to that finding. I forgot 147s, they shoot great out of my 6.5 wildcat too. I stuck with 140s for velocity from the short barrel.