Help with ladder test

[User4302021]

Primarily his method is for velocity but he has also stated optimally that velocity data coupled with 300 yd target shooting to get this data is best situation for reading results.

I had not heard that before. I believe you though. Do you have a link?

 

[nt7332]

It's in his interview with 6.5 guys. Around little over 8 minutes in.

 

[frostop]

Here is the interview

 

[Mc Fraser]

You are correct, I am following Scott, however by beeing wrong I actually found a load that works for my other rifle following the same process and then reload 4 each on the velocity node. I will keep trying thanks for the advice.
Someone said something about me not understanding CBTO vs COAL, I understand iti just made a typo in one of my posts on another topic.

 

[FEENIX]

Someone said something about me not understanding CBTO vs COAL, I understand iti just made a typo in one of my posts on another topic.

In your #1 post, you have a measurement of 3.30" and you said you use CBTO,

I couldn't seat the bullet at 3.34 as my chamber is short? I believe (99%) it was seated to 3.30, I use CBTO not COAL.

if that is true your COAL is extremely long. That is why I provided an example of actual CBTO and COAL measurements off my .270 AI load. In other words, you have it backward. The 3.30" measurement is a COAL, not CBTO.

 

[Mc Fraser]

In your #1 post, you have a measurement of 3.30" and you said you use CBTO, if that is true your COAL is extremely long. That is why I provided with an example of actual CBTO and COAL measurements off my .270 AI load. In other words, you have it backwards. The 3.30" measurement is a COAL, not CBTO.

Correct, but it was not because I don't know the difference, I just got confused cause I have a 300WM and a 270 Win that have almost the same CBTO and COAL.
270 Win with 140 Classic Hunter = 2.7355" CBTO
300 WM with 200 ELD-X = 2.7330" CBTO
Both have 3.34" book max COAL and the 270 Win I can only seat bullets at 3.30"
Don't take this wrong way I appreciate your advice.

 

[FEENIX]

Correct, but it was not because I don't know the difference, I just got confused cause I have a 300WM and a 270 Win that have almost the same CBTO and COAL.
270 Win with 140 Classic Hunter = 2.7355"
300 WM with 200 ELD-X = 2.7330"
Both have 3.34" book max COAL and the 270 Win I can only seat bullets at 3.30"
Don't take this wrong way I appreciate your advice.

As long as you know where your confusion lies, your statement ...

I couldn't seat the bullet at 3.34 as my chamber is short? I believe (99%) it was seated to 3.30, I use CBTO not COAL.

... could have simply been ...

I couldn't seat the bullet at 3.34 as my chamber is short? I believe (99%) it was seated to 3.30, I use COAL not CBTO.

Cheers!

 

[Mc Fraser]

I know!

 

[User4302021]

Here is the interview

I have watched that interview numerous times and I am surprised I never caught that comment.

However, I find it a bit ambiguous. I'm not sure if he was saying that the velocity flat spot should necessarily coincide with a clustering of rounds on the target at distance, or simply that shooting groups picked from the flat spot at a greater distance would allow you to more accurately pick a winner.

 

[nt7332]

I think from that comment he just uses that 300 yd target as another data point to compare velocity flat spots to groups with little vertical dispersion. I agree that the basis of his method is simply velocity flat spots but when time and location allows he will use a 300 ladder with his velocity data which makes total sense. Many people run ladder test with no chrono and simply look at areas again with little vertical and others run his method with no target and just velocity numbers. I think that he uses a hybrid method but definelty preaches heavy on just velocity numbers and flat spots. But yes sir his comment leaves some interpretation. I took it as he would do it at 300 optimally as he was directly referring to the 10 rounds he shot over the chorno.