ES SD issue

[Plinker147]

Velocity spikes usually won't show at a 100 yds in groups ups but I suppose it could. Got to be an brass/neck tension issue I would think?

 

[J E Custom]

Velocity spikes usually won't show at a 100 yds in groups ups but I suppose it could. Got to be an brass/neck tension issue I would think?

While working up loads I first start at 100 yards because the chronograph doesn't care what distance it is and at the same time I get an idea what the rifle likes without the shooter error. After finding the best SD's, I then start shooting at progressively longer and longer distances for changes in bullets and seating depths to get the best accuracy.

This sounds like a long process, but it has cut my load development time and components in half by solving one problem at a time. I also start load testing during break in and fire forming to get a general idea what the rifle likes, knowing your rifle is a great advantage and break in is very important to me for this reason.

Not to long ago I started chronagraphing during break-in and this has also helped to determine when the barrel is broken in and how it responds to fouling in hunting situations. The better you do the brake in, the sooner the barrel will settle down. I have tried other break in procedures and found that they only prolonged the change in velocity problem and the shoot one and clean method worked best if chronograph during break in until it settled down.

Now, after break in I find that the average velocity stays the same as average velocities at the completion of the break in. Only a change in components (Powder and/or primer lots) has made a difference. Looking back at many of my records, it appears that barrel contour has lots to do with the number of shots it takes to get a flyer, so heat may be a major culprit if everything stays the same.

Just an opinion and observation

J E CUSTOM

 

[foul bore]

While working up loads I first start at 100 yards because the chronograph doesn't care what distance it is and at the same time I get an idea what the rifle likes without the shooter error. After finding the best SD's, I then start shooting at progressively longer and longer distances for changes in bullets and seating depths to get the best accuracy.

This sounds like a long process, but it has cut my load development time and components in half by solving one problem at a time. I also start load testing during break in and fire forming to get a general idea what the rifle likes, knowing your rifle is a great advantage and break in is very important to me for this reason.

Not to long ago I started chronagraphing during break-in and this has also helped to determine when the barrel is broken in and how it responds to fouling in hunting situations. The better you do the brake in, the sooner the barrel will settle down. I have tried other break in procedures and found that they only prolonged the change in velocity problem and the shoot one and clean method worked best if chronograph during break in until it settled down.

Now, after break in I find that the average velocity stays the same as average velocities at the completion of the break in. Only a change in components (Powder and/or primer lots) has made a difference. Looking back at many of my records, it appears that barrel contour has lots to do with the number of shots it takes to get a flyer, so heat may be a major culprit if everything stays the same.

Just an opinion and observation

J E CUSTOM

You just described the route I have been taking with the exception of not chronagraphing seating depth process. I will take your advice and continue. It is hard to stay patient. Thanks for all you help

 

[J E Custom]

You just described the route I have been taking with the exception of not chronagraphing seating depth process. I will take your advice and continue. It is hard to stay patient. Thanks for all you help

I tried guessing what the problem was for many years and finally came to the conclusion I was not very good at it, so I went on a mission to eliminate one problem at a time. All though not totally there yet, I learn something that helps as I go.

With a methodical approach I have reduced average group size from Under 1 MOA to a starting point of 1/2 MOA or less. Is it worth the effort? only the shooter can answer that depending how good he wan'ts/needs. some feel that anything around 1 MOA is good enough. And they may be right. but getting consistent sub 1/2 MOA is a challenge that I like, and enjoy the fruits of my labor.

Anything that you can get unbiased data for can help. so I like to use equipment that doesn't care how or what you do, It just gives you real data to digest.

J E CUSTOM

 

[foul bore]

I tried guessing what the problem was for many years and finally came to the conclusion I was not very good at it, so I went on a mission to eliminate one problem at a time. All though not totally there yet, I learn something that helps as I go.

With a methodical approach I have reduced average group size from Under 1 MOA to a starting point of 1/2 MOA or less. Is it worth the effort? only the shooter can answer that depending how good he wan'ts/needs. some feel that anything around 1 MOA is good enough. And they may be right. but getting consistent sub 1/2 MOA is a challenge that I like, and enjoy the fruits of my labor.

Anything that you can get unbiased data for can help. so I like to use equipment that doesn't care how or what you do, It just gives you real data to digest.

J E CUSTOM

1 MOA is not at all acceptable I really want sub 1/2 MOA. I'm so stubborn I won't quit till I get there. just wish I could get there quicker. again thanks