Lately, there has been a lot written about "shake and bake" load development using ladders, OCW, etc. Don't get me wrong, these are viable methods, and I have used them with good success, but they should be considered one part of the process, particularly as the demand placed on the rifle is increased. I find myself using these tools most productively as a final test of my loads viability, periodic checks for throat wear, or a lot change of a component(s). A new barrel on my long range rifles "generally" sees 100+rounds before I will use them for 1000 yard hunting or competition. Many barrels(including the top makers) have required as many as 100+ rounds to stabilize velocity and/or accuracy. My criteria for a load is a minimum of 5 shot, sub .5MOA performance-hot or cold, ES<15FPS, holds zero, and is temperature stable across the encountered temperature range of use. Sometimes I have simply picked a load simply using a copied recipe, and it worked out perfectly. Most times it, took much more work to find a load to meet my requirements. Putting the effort into the optimimum choice of bullet, powder, primer, seating depth, brass prep/neck tension, etc. can make the difference between a good rifle and a
great rifle. Unfortunately, most of my very best shooters did not come easy......but it was usually worth the effort. I'll give up 200 rounds and the extra work of load development for 1000+ of high confidence shots from a rifle, without hesitation.
A recent ladder test of my PRS load With a powder/bullet lot change at 1000 rounds, and actual loads used. Same as 400 round test(third photo)